1200cal/day really works.

Biotin?

I will have to google this to see if it's something I want to add to my repertoire. As it stands though, if I am faced with the choice of eating while on maintenance..:

1) 1200 cals plus a biotin pill, capsule, sub-lingual dose or whatever
OR
2) 1200 cals plus 300 more cals while on maintenance, I'm pretty sure I'm going to opt for the 300 extra cals.

(Probably in the form of a daily pop tart and a glass of milk.)

Is the point of the thread to say that 1200 works for some, but not for others? Because that's totally true...But maybe I'm missing the point.

I've lost a total of 115 pounds since 2009 in spurts (40 pounds hardcore for a couple of months, maintenance for a few months, 20 pounds for a couple, maintenance...so on). I'm pleased with my progress, because for me, it was realistic. I like having beers during the summer!

That being said, I know my body at this point, and the only way I can lose weight is if I eat roughly 1200 cals a day, with very little carbs. I've recently upped my carb intake because I've started a more-intense-than-I've-been-used-to workout regime within the last few weeks and I was not getting the most out of the workout.

Anyway, that works for me...actually, it's the only thing that works for me. I've had my metabolism tested, seen endocrinologists, got hormone tested, etc etc. All signs point to "you can't eat as much or what everyone else does, young lady".

And before anyone says "are you sure you're eating only that much?", yes, yes I am sure. I have a digital scale and I'm militant about measuring out my recipes. I freak out if I can't properly quantify how much/exactly what I ate in a day.

But! point is! That's just me! That's what works for me. Other people have different strategies, and great success! And that's great. I'd love to be one of those people, but i'm not...that's all.

(Stats: 29/F/5'7" SW: 300 lbs in 2009 CW: somewhere around 185 lbs. I stopped weighing myself since I started working out because my body does not want to lose weight when I weight train, and I didn't want to discourage myself)

Please elaborate, what specific conditions turned out to be the cause for this? What is the incidence of said condition in the general population according to your understanding from said Dr. appointment or reliable google research?

Jeez louise, that's a bit snarky, don't you think?

I have PCOS and insulin resistance (thanks to a ****ty diet/lack of exercise for the first 25 years of my life) both tested and confirmed from blood testing and continued visits with my Dr over the last 10 years. I have *also* had my metabolism checked because I was convinced that the steroid treatment after a small tumor was removed from my breast had changed the way I metabolised food.

Now, the "incidence of said condition(s)" are probably pretty low, in combination, I'd say. But, again, *for me* this is the sitch, 'tis what it is. For others, it isn't. And that's fine. But no one formula works for everyone, I don't think.

Thank you so much for clarifying. It was not my intent in the least to come off as snarky but only as asking a sincere question in earnest regarding what type of condition would necessitate this. I had heard of PCOS and suspected it might be that and just wanted the clarification for anyone who might be reading and not have access to health care to know that it's a specific diagnosis and that they are free to google it and see it's actual incidence in the general population and weigh those odds in when deciding if they think this might actually apply to them or not.

My apologies if my brief and to the point tone came off as snarky :flowerforyou: . I really meant no harm.

Eh, no worries, I probably read a tone that was non existant. We're square.

I guess the point of me participating in this conversation after being a member of mfp for two years of lurking is to say that aren't we all fighting the same battle? We're all here for the same reasons - to better ourselves in one way or another.

But isn't it safe to say that "bettering ourselves" doesn't necessarily mean *just* losing weight? Maybe it's getting to know one's body as well. It's not going to be okay to eat the way you used to anymore in order to succeed, so this isn't a diet, it's a lifestyle. And how best to make it a lifestyle, than to have better knowledge of how your body works?

What I'm trying to say is that we all are fighting the same battle, but with different weaponry. Why speak ill of someone else's weapons? Maybe it works for them! Maybe they're doomed for failure! Who knows? But the point is, no matter what, they figured it out. And learning from your mistakes is what creates for a long lasting result, I think.

I'm questioning myself why I've participated in such a debate, as I don't normally speak up nor care, but when I read things like "just because you're a special snowflake" or "This isn't about YOU", I get a bit disheartened because this is a community. A community of people voicing what worked for them, and how excited they are to find out that it worked for them. it just seemed like the opposite of that was happening; people were being isolated, called out, because the methods used weren't the same as consensus.

In short, i guess, why speak ill of one's methods, if a. it worked well for them, b. they're able to sustain the method in order to become a lifestyle, and c. it's not like the method that you're using? Isn't that a bit mean? We're all here for the same reasons.

Just my two cents. Who knows. We're all here to get positive feedback, so hell, if 2300 calories a day works for you, **** yeah! If you need a much lower caloric intake to see any results, cool too! lets eat some miracle noodles together.

Is the point of the thread to say that 1200 works for some, but not for others? Because that's totally true...But maybe I'm missing the point.

I've lost a total of 115 pounds since 2009 in spurts (40 pounds hardcore for a couple of months, maintenance for a few months, 20 pounds for a couple, maintenance...so on). I'm pleased with my progress, because for me, it was realistic. I like having beers during the summer!

That being said, I know my body at this point, and the only way I can lose weight is if I eat roughly 1200 cals a day, with very little carbs. I've recently upped my carb intake because I've started a more-intense-than-I've-been-used-to workout regime within the last few weeks and I was not getting the most out of the workout.

Anyway, that works for me...actually, it's the only thing that works for me. I've had my metabolism tested, seen endocrinologists, got hormone tested, etc etc. All signs point to "you can't eat as much or what everyone else does, young lady".

And before anyone says "are you sure you're eating only that much?", yes, yes I am sure. I have a digital scale and I'm militant about measuring out my recipes. I freak out if I can't properly quantify how much/exactly what I ate in a day.

But! point is! That's just me! That's what works for me. Other people have different strategies, and great success! And that's great. I'd love to be one of those people, but i'm not...that's all.

(Stats: 29/F/5'7" SW: 300 lbs in 2009 CW: somewhere around 185 lbs. I stopped weighing myself since I started working out because my body does not want to lose weight when I weight train, and I didn't want to discourage myself)

Please elaborate, what specific conditions turned out to be the cause for this? What is the incidence of said condition in the general population according to your understanding from said Dr. appointment or reliable google research?

Jeez louise, that's a bit snarky, don't you think?

I have PCOS and insulin resistance (thanks to a ****ty diet/lack of exercise for the first 25 years of my life) both tested and confirmed from blood testing and continued visits with my Dr over the last 10 years. I have *also* had my metabolism checked because I was convinced that the steroid treatment after a small tumor was removed from my breast had changed the way I metabolised food.

Now, the "incidence of said condition(s)" are probably pretty low, in combination, I'd say. But, again, *for me* this is the sitch, 'tis what it is. For others, it isn't. And that's fine. But no one formula works for everyone, I don't think.

Thank you so much for clarifying. It was not my intent in the least to come off as snarky but only as asking a sincere question in earnest regarding what type of condition would necessitate this. I had heard of PCOS and suspected it might be that and just wanted the clarification for anyone who might be reading and not have access to health care to know that it's a specific diagnosis and that they are free to google it and see it's actual incidence in the general population and weigh those odds in when deciding if they think this might actually apply to them or not.

My apologies if my brief and to the point tone came off as snarky :flowerforyou: . I really meant no harm.

Eh, no worries, I probably read a tone that was non existant. We're square.

I guess the point of me participating in this conversation after being a member of mfp for two years of lurking is to say that aren't we all fighting the same battle? We're all here for the same reasons - to better ourselves in one way or another.

But isn't it safe to say that "bettering ourselves" doesn't necessarily mean *just* losing weight? Maybe it's getting to know one's body as well. It's not going to be okay to eat the way you used to anymore in order to succeed, so this isn't a diet, it's a lifestyle. And how best to make it a lifestyle, than to have better knowledge of how your body works?

What I'm trying to say is that we all are fighting the same battle, but with different weaponry. Why speak ill of someone else's weapons? Maybe it works for them! Maybe they're doomed for failure! Who knows? But the point is, no matter what, they figured it out. And learning from your mistakes is what creates for a long lasting result, I think.

I'm questioning myself why I've participated in such a debate, as I don't normally speak up nor care, but when I read things like "just because you're a special snowflake" or "This isn't about YOU", I get a bit disheartened because this is a community. A community of people voicing what worked for them, and how excited they are to find out that it worked for them. it just seemed like the opposite of that was happening; people were being isolated, called out, because the methods used weren't the same as consensus.

In short, i guess, why speak ill of one's methods, if a. it worked well for them, b. they're able to sustain the method in order to become a lifestyle, and c. it's not like the method that you're using? Isn't that a bit mean? We're all here for the same reasons.

Just my two cents. Who knows. We're all here to get positive feedback, so hell, if 2300 calories a day works for you, **** yeah! If you need a much lower caloric intake to see any results, cool too! lets eat some miracle noodles together.

In short, i guess, why speak ill of one's methods, if a. it worked well for them, b. they're able to sustain the method in order to become a lifestyle, and c. it's not like the method that you're using? Isn't that a bit mean? We're all here for the same reasons.

Just my two cents. Who knows. We're all here to get positive feedback, so hell, if 2300 calories a day works for you, **** yeah! If you need a much lower caloric intake to see any results, cool too! lets eat some miracle noodles together.

Why speak ill of one's methods? Por ejemplo, "I lost all my weight regurgitating after meals."
a) functional b) sustainable c) not the method that most are using. Bad idea.

Nobody said their throwing up their meals, lol.

Nobody said their throwing up their meals, lol.

This is true. I was taking an outrageous example that satisfied the proposed criteria to establish that it isn't reasonable to say that we should be supportive of any/all approaches.

So then the question becomes, where does one draw the line between "healthy" success and "unhealthy" success.

This thread illustrates one such possible line. Rhetorical questions, then: would that line change if MFP recommended no less than 1300 instead of 1200? Would 1200 still be the line or would it become 1300?

I certainly have my own strongly held opinions on the matter but don't want to piss into the wind on this thread. Trench warfare sucks.

Some people just don't get that it's not about YOU, it's about letting the thousands of silent lurking readers know that 1200 is NOT the only option, that the vast majority of people can eat quite a bit more than 1200 and enjoy themselves while getting healthy, instead of choosing between one or the other.