I abandoned 1200 calories per day, and so should you
Replies
-
I do agree. 1200 calories is more than enough for me when I am making wise food choices. In fact, I am more satisfied on a 1200 calorie intake when eating fruits, vegetables, and lean meats.0
-
Might as well have walked in a room and said "America is better than Europe" then walked out.0
-
I have a quick question. This has been asked a couple of times, but not addressed. I'm 5'3" and weigh 190. I've lost 14 pounds (8 pounds before starting MFP) but have a long way to go. MFP also suggested the 1200 cal for me to meet my goals, but these are net calories. When I exercise, and depending on the exercise, I eat anywhere from 1400 to 1600 calories, because I eat my exercise calories, so my net calories stay right at 1200 calories. So, my question is, when you all discuss the calories and whether 1200 is a good, sustainable goal, are you talking about net calories?0
-
I never even considered trying for 2Ibs a week loss when I joined, or 1200. I do not see the benefit of such extremes, barring a few specific circumstances. I can happily lose a Ib a week, netting 1600-1700 calories, and I am very thankful for that as I like to ensure my body gets what it needs to keep my fires burning strong. Just because one feels satisfied on 1200 calories a day, does not mean it is beneficial or optimal.
I think what many people fail to consider when they put themselves on such low calories, is that they are buggering up their metabolism unless they are somehow getting a good amount of protein, by ensuring they lose plenty of lean mass, alongside the fat. As we all know, muscle uses up more calories than fat.0 -
Really? Craziest thing, but I've been netting between 1,000 and 1,200 calories a day and exercising, and I'm losing an average of 3.2 lbs. a week.0
-
I'm not 3 feet tall, but my maintenance on different sites is usually calculated between 1550-1650. A 350 calorie a day deficit is not dangerous.
Some people should abandon 1200 calories a day. Others are just fine.0 -
I've also read many posts from girls who lost on 1200 calories..then could never eat at maintenance without gaining. So it ruins your metabolism..and you have to starve forever to stay at your goal weight.
Eat more…and lose slower ..think of the end game… to be able to eat normal again!!!!0 -
Did you use a food scale? This sounds like under estimating calorie intake. At 5'7" 150, 1200 should have led to weight loss.
I kind of agree. Not that I advocate 1200. I did it, but I would definitely not say it's the best way to lose weight.
Even if you are inactive, 1200 is a deficit. No matter how little or how much you're exercising, you should - hypothetically - lose weight on 1200. Were you counting calories in the little things? Butter, oil, liquids, creamer... etc?0 -
I've also read many posts from girls who lost on 1200 calories..then could never eat at maintenance without gaining. So it ruins your metabolism..and you have to starve forever to stay at your goal weight.
Eat more…and lose slower ..think of the end game… to be able to eat normal again!!!!
Any person losing on any calorie limit is going to have
1. Initial weight gain of 3-5 pounds
2. Reduced metabolism due to the loss of mass / increase of efficiency
I have lost on 1200 for a long period, then was able to maintain at a level very close (even slightly higher) than what the website suggested for maintenance. It really is a highly individual thing. For some it works for some it doesn't.0 -
I think it all depends on your activity level, too, as to whether 1200 is enough. I run 4-6 miles three days a week and do heavy lifting the other three days of the week, and for me 1200 would be "starvation"-- I don't mean "starvation mode" but that I would simply not be eating enough food to fuel my workouts. I would be ravenous, and probably flat on my back by the end of week one.I do agree. 1200 calories is more than enough for me when I am making wise food choices. In fact, I am more satisfied on a 1200 calorie intake when eating fruits, vegetables, and lean meats.
I've went this entire route before of low calorie eating when trying to lose weight, and it doesn't work for me under any circumstance (unless I'm sick and really can't eat anything). Now, I don't have to worry about it because I am trying to maintain.
0 -
1,000 is definitely too low and 3.2 pounds a week is too fast. Neither is sustainable.Really? Craziest thing, but I've been netting between 1,000 and 1,200 calories a day and exercising, and I'm losing an average of 3.2 lbs. a week.0 -
separate comment::::::::1200 calories is A LOT of food if a person is eating lean meat, FRESH veggies, lean fish and using regular condiments---there is even enough to have an avocado/ a small amount of olive oil.....fresh fruit etc
I agree, if you eat the right foods, 1,200 calories is a lot of food and usually very tasty if you know how to cook
srs?
If I ate nothing but fish, meat and veggies (and when I'm cutting, often that's exactly what I do), I would still need 1200 calories by lunchtime. 1200 calories is never 'a lot' of food. You can make it less pitiful by eating high volume, high fibre, high protein foods, but please, don't take the p*ss by pretending it's 'a lot'. Two year olds put away more food than that. The average female requires 2000 cals/day. So in no way, shape or form can you justify calling 1200 calories 'a lot of food'. Ugh.0 -
separate comment::::::::1200 calories is A LOT of food if a person is eating lean meat, FRESH veggies, lean fish and using regular condiments---there is even enough to have an avocado/ a small amount of olive oil.....fresh fruit etc
I agree, if you eat the right foods, 1,200 calories is a lot of food and usually very tasty if you know how to cook srs?
If I ate nothing but fish, meat and veggies (and when I'm cutting, often that's exactly what I do), I would still need 1200 calories by lunchtime. 1200 calories is never 'a lot' of food. You can make it less pitiful by eating high volume, high fibre, high protein foods, but please, don't take the p*ss by pretending it's 'a lot'. Two year olds put away more food than that. The average female requires 2000 cals/day. So in no way, shape or form can you justify calling 1200 calories 'a lot of food'. Ugh.
No 1,200 probably isn't enough for you judging by your profile pic. If you have a lot of muscle bulk you need more calories. Personally my body doesn't need to be fuelled like a steam engine, I have an office job and don't workout, so my intake is plenty.
Everyone is different.0 -
And then there's those people that say, "I know I should eat more than x amount of calories, but I'm not hungry and I can't force myself to eat!" If you can't eat more than 1200 calories, how did you get fat in the first place?!
^^^ I have thought that many times!!0 -
I've also read many posts from girls who lost on 1200 calories..then could never eat at maintenance without gaining. So it ruins your metabolism..and you have to starve forever to stay at your goal weight.
Eat more…and lose slower ..think of the end game… to be able to eat normal again!!!!
There is no scientific basis for the statement, "So it ruins your metabolism..and you have to starve forever to stay at your goal weight." Your body doesn't work like that, it is quite able to re-adjust itself after a period of low calorie deficit.
"Energy restriction produces a transient hypothyroid-hypometabolic state that normalizes on return to energy-balanced conditions. Failure to establish energy balance after weight loss gives the misleading impression that weight-reduced persons are energy conservative and predisposed to weight regain. Our findings do not provide evidence in support of adaptive metabolic changes as an explanation for the tendency of weight-reduced persons to regain weight."
-Reference is: Am J Clin Nutr. 2001 Mar;73(3):655-8.
Plus:
" Several rigorous studies done at the University of Alabama in Birmingham showed that metabolism goes back to expected levels with sustained weight loss, discounting the theory that a lowered metabolism helps to explain the common phenomenon of weight regain following weight loss."
-Several sites state the same study.
Okay carry on.0 -
separate comment::::::::1200 calories is A LOT of food if a person is eating lean meat, FRESH veggies, lean fish and using regular condiments---there is even enough to have an avocado/ a small amount of olive oil.....fresh fruit etc
I agree, if you eat the right foods, 1,200 calories is a lot of food and usually very tasty if you know how to cook srs?
If I ate nothing but fish, meat and veggies (and when I'm cutting, often that's exactly what I do), I would still need 1200 calories by lunchtime. 1200 calories is never 'a lot' of food. You can make it less pitiful by eating high volume, high fibre, high protein foods, but please, don't take the p*ss by pretending it's 'a lot'. Two year olds put away more food than that. The average female requires 2000 cals/day. So in no way, shape or form can you justify calling 1200 calories 'a lot of food'. Ugh.
I have a 20 month old daughter. No way in hell she eats anywhere even close to 1200 calories and the doc says she's perfectly healthy. I have a son, also, and at two years old, he was not eating that many calories, either. And when you say "average female"... what is average? I see this statement a lot, and I would just like to know where people are getting this information about the "average female".0 -
separate comment::::::::1200 calories is A LOT of food if a person is eating lean meat, FRESH veggies, lean fish and using regular condiments---there is even enough to have an avocado/ a small amount of olive oil.....fresh fruit etc
I agree, if you eat the right foods, 1,200 calories is a lot of food and usually very tasty if you know how to cook srs?
If I ate nothing but fish, meat and veggies (and when I'm cutting, often that's exactly what I do), I would still need 1200 calories by lunchtime. 1200 calories is never 'a lot' of food. You can make it less pitiful by eating high volume, high fibre, high protein foods, but please, don't take the p*ss by pretending it's 'a lot'. Two year olds put away more food than that. The average female requires 2000 cals/day. So in no way, shape or form can you justify calling 1200 calories 'a lot of food'. Ugh.
No 1,200 probably isn't enough for you judging by your profile pic. If you have a lot of muscle bulk you need more calories. Personally my body doesn't need to be fuelled like a steam engine, I have an office job and don't workout, so my intake is plenty.
Everyone is different.
Well interestingly, if you'll read what I said, I didn't mention whether anyone should or shouldn't eat 1200 calories. I simply commented that it is not, by any means, 'a lot of food'. I don't care how you treat your body and if you want to eat like a 2 year old be my guest, but don't bullsh*t around saying it's 'a lot of food'. It's not. That's why people lose weight very quickly on 1200 cals. Duh.0 -
Also, 1 lb muscle requires 4g cals/day more than fat. Hardly enough to account for my 2800+ calorie maintenance requirement, especially given that at 126 lb I don't have all that much muscle mass. The difference between me being 18% (current) body fat and, say, 30%, is 60 calories per day. So your 'bulk' comment is vapid at best.0
-
I appreciate what you shared!!!! Thank-you!!!!0
-
0 -
Also, 1 lb muscle requires 4g cals/day more than fat. Hardly enough to account for my 2800+ calorie maintenance requirement, especially given that at 126 lb I don't have all that much muscle mass. The difference between me being 18% (current) body fat and, say, 30%, is 60 calories per day. So your 'bulk' comment is vapid at best.
60 calories per day 'at rest' maybe, but undoubtedly you do not spend your maintenance days in bed resting. At 1,200 calories I am not starving or even hungry, losing 1lb a week on average which is reasonable but certainly not rapid!0 -
Good luck to you.
I was hitting a plateau as well. My mfp daily suggestion is 1400. I routinely stay below by 200-350 calories. I recently increased my calories for a day or two a week and now I've started losing again. I've dropped 4 pounds in 2 weeks.
I think switching up your calories might help.
Best of luck.
tmp3430 -
its working for me , its keeping me on track and im not hungry, actually it depends if im eating balanced or not, if go low carbs one day that's it im starving alllllllllll day, eating balanced at 1200 per day im great0
-
Also, 1 lb muscle requires 4g cals/day more than fat. Hardly enough to account for my 2800+ calorie maintenance requirement, especially given that at 126 lb I don't have all that much muscle mass. The difference between me being 18% (current) body fat and, say, 30%, is 60 calories per day. So your 'bulk' comment is vapid at best.
60 calories per day 'at rest' maybe, but undoubtedly you do not spend your maintenance days in bed resting. At 1,200 calories I am not starving or even hungry, losing 1lb a week on average which is reasonable but certainly not rapid!
And judging by weeks back in your diary your logging is spotty at best. Unless you truly only ate pizza hut for dinner one day and that's it. If that's true, I feel sorry for you. That's no way to live but hey, whatever. I prefer to you know, enjoy my life. Eat a balanced diet and still throw in some fun things0 -
can someone take a minute and help me understand TDEE/BMR. I haven't a clue and I just use the 1200 calories MFP said to eat. Been at it 8 wks and have lost 9 pounds. Also I could use some suggestions about losing belly fat. I am 72 yrs old, 5'3" and I walk every day and do some light weight lifting. I can see the results except my belly was big and firm now it is big and bread dough like. I have been happy with the weight loss but would like to know if I am eating the right amount of calories. I eat a good amount of protein, veggies and fruit. any help would be appreciated. :drinker:0
-
Also, 1 lb muscle requires 4g cals/day more than fat. Hardly enough to account for my 2800+ calorie maintenance requirement, especially given that at 126 lb I don't have all that much muscle mass. The difference between me being 18% (current) body fat and, say, 30%, is 60 calories per day. So your 'bulk' comment is vapid at best.
60 calories per day 'at rest' maybe, but undoubtedly you do not spend your maintenance days in bed resting. At 1,200 calories I am not starving or even hungry, losing 1lb a week on average which is reasonable but certainly not rapid!
I was responding to your inaccurate assertion,
'If you have a lot of muscle bulk you need more calories.'
Please try to follow your own line of argument. It makes it very difficult for you to understand why you are wrong otherwise.0 -
Also, 1 lb muscle requires 4g cals/day more than fat. Hardly enough to account for my 2800+ calorie maintenance requirement, especially given that at 126 lb I don't have all that much muscle mass. The difference between me being 18% (current) body fat and, say, 30%, is 60 calories per day. So your 'bulk' comment is vapid at best.
60 calories per day 'at rest' maybe, but undoubtedly you do not spend your maintenance days in bed resting. At 1,200 calories I am not starving or even hungry, losing 1lb a week on average which is reasonable but certainly not rapid!
And judging by weeks back in your diary your logging is spotty at best. Unless you truly only ate pizza hut for dinner one day and that's it. If that's true, I feel sorry for you. That's no way to live but hey, whatever. I prefer to you know, enjoy my life. Eat a balanced diet and still throw in some fun things
That was just 1 day out of 3 months of logging. I did only eat a pizza from Pizza Hut because I had been having fun at a Comic Con all day and I didn't fancy the cakes and fries on sale at the event, so I waited until we left.
That day I had worked up a raging appetite, but a single day of what many people would class a mini fast is not going to hurt anyone. As it happens the following day I was ill with a vomiting bug so you could probably criticise that day too! My logging is not spotty, sometimes 'real life' gets in the way - it's not always 100% enjoyment in most peoples' life. Good luck with your perfect life!0 -
Also, 1 lb muscle requires 4g cals/day more than fat. Hardly enough to account for my 2800+ calorie maintenance requirement, especially given that at 126 lb I don't have all that much muscle mass. The difference between me being 18% (current) body fat and, say, 30%, is 60 calories per day. So your 'bulk' comment is vapid at best.
60 calories per day 'at rest' maybe, but undoubtedly you do not spend your maintenance days in bed resting. At 1,200 calories I am not starving or even hungry, losing 1lb a week on average which is reasonable but certainly not rapid!
I was responding to your inaccurate assertion,
'If you have a lot of muscle bulk you need more calories.'
Please try to follow your own line of argument. It makes it very difficult for you to understand why you are wrong otherwise.
You do need more calories, you said this yourself!0 -
can someone take a minute and help me understand TDEE/BMR. I haven't a clue and I just use the 1200 calories MFP said to eat. Been at it 8 wks and have lost 9 pounds. Also I could use some suggestions about losing belly fat. I am 72 yrs old, 5'3" and I walk every day and do some light weight lifting. I can see the results except my belly was big and firm now it is big and bread dough like. I have been happy with the weight loss but would like to know if I am eating the right amount of calories. I eat a good amount of protein, veggies and fruit. any help would be appreciated. :drinker:
BMR is the cals your body burns just to function... TDEE is the cals you burn with your daily physical activity (which is rarely accurate in online calculators)
Now as far as targeted fat loss? Not possible. You can try to build muscle in areas, but your body is in charge of what areas of fat it burns. You only option is medical or surgical for targeted loss.
Anyone else is welcome to add or correct this...0 -
That was just 1 day out of 3 months of logging. I did only eat a pizza from Pizza Hut because I had been having fun at a Comic Con all day and I didn't fancy the cakes and fries on sale at the event, so I waited until we left.
That day I had worked up a raging appetite, but a single day of what many people would class a mini fast is not going to hurt anyone. As it happens the following day I was ill with a vomiting bug so you could probably criticise that day too! My logging is not spotty, sometimes 'real life' gets in the way - it's not always 100% enjoyment in most peoples' life. Good luck with your perfect life!
Aren't you pleasant. I'm just going to leave it with hangry and go eat ma ice cream. Have fun singing the joys of 1200 calories0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions