Is it necessary to get at least 1200 net calories?

Options
ssbmacdaddy
ssbmacdaddy Posts: 124 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
With exercise I frequently do not get to 1200 net calories and I read recently that u need at least 1200- 1800 net to loose weight. I am a male 5 11 and 220 lbs. do I really need to make sure to get 1200 net calories. (Net calories is on the top of the mfp food log)
«1

Replies

  • JaneyB311
    JaneyB311 Posts: 80 Member
    Options
    I personally think it's different strokes for different folks.

    I was eating either just on or just below 1200 and exercising most days too. At first the weight was falling off quickly but in February I pretty much stuck, losing only 2.5lb in the whole of February despite doing nothing different. I decided (after advice to do so) to increase my food intake up to calories up to 1500 and never net below 1200 after exercise. (However I make sure my post-exercise food is protein based, usually either nuts/nut butter or a protein shake.)

    My weight moved pretty much instantly and I've dropped a further 14lb in 5 weeks.

    I would say just keep an eye on your weight loss and if it slows up consider eating a few more calories from healthy sources and see if it helps. However 1200 does seems a little on the low side for a guy of your height and current weight.

    Good luck :)
  • helizi
    helizi Posts: 30 Member
    Options
    The problem with getting too few calories is that you also risk not getting enough nutrients like protein, fat and vitamins/minerals. You don't need to eat more for the sake of eating more if you're feeling fine on >1200/day (though I'd be surprised if you do, esp with the exercise) but you definitely need to make all the food you eat as nutritious as possible.
  • gypsy_spirit
    gypsy_spirit Posts: 2,107 Member
    Options
    You're a man? You're 5'11"? Is it necessary for you to get at least 1200 calories?

    If you answered yes to the first 2 questions, then the answer to the third is probably yes, too. Where did you get the 1200 from? Go and read this link and then rethink your plan. Do you really want to live on this amount of food when it's not necessary? I'm a 56 year old woman and I eat between 1600 - 1800 calories a day and lose about 1 pound a week. As the previous poster stated, it's very hard to meet your nutritional needs with so few calories. You add exercise and the need goes higher. Short term that might not be a problem, but over time can affect your health. To me, that's my number one priority.

    Read this, PLEASE:

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1175494-a-guide-to-get-you-started-on-your-path-to-sexypants
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,136 Member
    Options
    yes, you should try to net 1200 calories..if you chronically under eat then you will suffer metabolic adaption at some point, which will slow your metabolism down and damage it. Additionally, you will burn through a lot of muscle mass eating under 1200 and do you really want to be skinny fat?

    Finally, how did you end up at 220 pounds and now you can't even net 1200?

    I am 5-10 male 170 pounds and i am eating 2200 a day right now and that is a cut for me…

    You could easily eat/net 1800 - 2000 a day and still lose a pound per week, probably more…
  • Ninkyou
    Ninkyou Posts: 6,666 Member
    Options
    Yes. You should. A 5'11 male needs a heck of alot more calories than a woman under 5'2. Just an example. 1200 calories, NET is what a petite woman needs. Are you a petite woman? No. You're a man, you need more calories. You're tall, you need more calories. Remember that your body needs a minimum amount of calories just to do basic life functions. Get too low and your body will shut down the "nonessential" functions... (like hair growth). Not only that, but your workouts will begin to suffer, you leave yourself more prone to injury and you'll begin to FEEL miserable. You'll lack energy and be tired all the time.

    Yes, you will lose weight, but you'll be miserable and putting your body at risk.
    If you're having trouble netting 1200 calories, eat more caloric dense foods. Stop eating 'diet' foods that you may have switched to. Eat full fat cheeses, dairy, nuts, peanut butter, ice cream, etc. You can eat all your normal foods, just exercise moderation.
  • Laughter_Girl
    Laughter_Girl Posts: 2,226 Member
    Options
    I'm no doctor, nurse or nutritionist and not qualified to answer this question. I will say, however, that I personally need more than 1200 calories a day. Why, you ask? 1. I'm hungry. 2. I need the fuel (food) to energize me throughout my workouts. 3. I need to ensure I have enough calories to get the protein to help me build my muscles after strength training. 4. I have lost more weight eating more calories.

    Wishing you the best on your journey to a healthier you!
  • lisaabenjamin
    lisaabenjamin Posts: 665 Member
    Options
    Agree with all that has been said - 1200 is generally considered the absolute minimum calorie goal for anyone on a weightloss plan, but it's generally too low for many people, and certainly for a 5 ft 11 man.

    I was also wondering if the OP is confused by what 'net' calories is? Sorry if that is really patronising and I'm teaching you to suck eggs, but quite a few people on MFP seem to get it wrong. Net calories is the number left when you subtract calories burnt from calories consumed, e.g. if your goal is (say) 1200 net cals per day, and you do no exercise, then you should aim to consume 1200 in food and drink. If you burn 200 cals through exercise, then you get to eat an extra 200 cals to compensate. If you eat 1200 calories and don't eat those 200 cals back, then you have 'netted' 1000 calories.

    ETA: If you open your diary, OP, then we can have a look and see where you might be going wrong.
  • ssbmacdaddy
    ssbmacdaddy Posts: 124 Member
    Options
    Thanks for all information. I will give example of typical recent day. My calorie goal is 1410 now as I am listed as sedentary. I ate 1729 food, exercised 835, net 894, had 516 calories left. It was 10 at night when finishing workout and just could not eat anything more at that hour. Do u think I'm slowing down fat loss by under eating. I figure it's all estimates and I'm leaving a cushion in case exercise was overinflated or food was under valued. Although I usually try to overinflated food and under value exercise. For instance 3 days of the week I'm standing 8 hours a day and on my feet. I googled how many calories standing burns and it's 112/hr - not a lot but it collects. I did not want to say I was lightly active as 4 days a week I am more sedentary yet I do exercise daily which I include in calculations. Most standing days I do not include standing in the calculations. What do u think I should do?
  • lemonsnowdrop
    lemonsnowdrop Posts: 1,298 Member
    Options
    Eat some peanut butter.
  • danitawilliams
    danitawilliams Posts: 1
    Options
    i dont know how true that is but i go over my 1200 and seems to me i am not losing...so i need to try to stay below my 1200 or like you said you excercise so that helps out alot...but i excersice to but maybe i need to step my game up...
  • wilsoje74
    wilsoje74 Posts: 1,720 Member
    Options
    Thanks for all information. I will give example of typical recent day. My calorie goal is 1410 now as I am listed as sedentary. I ate 1729 food, exercised 835, net 894, had 516 calories left. It was 10 at night when finishing workout and just could not eat anything more at that hour. Do u think I'm slowing down fat loss by under eating. I figure it's all estimates and I'm leaving a cushion in case exercise was overinflated or food was under valued. Although I usually try to overinflated food and under value exercise. For instance 3 days of the week I'm standing 8 hours a day and on my feet. I googled how many calories standing burns and it's 112/hr - not a lot but it collects. I did not want to say I was lightly active as 4 days a week I am more sedentary yet I do exercise daily which I include in calculations. Most standing days I do not include standing in the calculations. What do u think I should do?

    Don't add standing. What exercise do you do to burn 800 cal? That's pretty high.
  • OkamiLavande
    OkamiLavande Posts: 336 Member
    Options
    In my opinion is depends on how your body is reacting to it.

    Are you still losing weight? Are you still losing inches? Has anything stalled out? If no, then maybe your fine. On the other hand though, you are taking away calories your body needs for fuel to keep working out so maybe eating back some of your exercise calories would be a good investment. You can play around with how much you eat to suit yourself. I know it's hard to net a certain amount of calories but weight loss can be improved if you do. Even if the scale doesn't budge, measurements usually do.
  • ssbmacdaddy
    ssbmacdaddy Posts: 124 Member
    Options
    Thanks for all information. I will give example of typical recent day. My calorie goal is 1410 now as I am listed as sedentary. I ate 1729 food, exercised 835, net 894, had 516 calories left. It was 10 at night when finishing workout and just could not eat anything more at that hour. Do u think I'm slowing down fat loss by under eating. I figure it's all estimates and I'm leaving a cushion in case exercise was overinflated or food was under valued. Although I usually try to overinflated food and under value exercise. For instance 3 days of the week I'm standing 8 hours a day and on my feet. I googled how many calories standing burns and it's 112/hr - not a lot but it collects. I did not want to say I was lightly active as 4 days a week I am more sedentary yet I do exercise daily which I include in calculations. Most standing days I do not include standing in the calculations. What do u think I should do?

    Don't add standing. What exercise do you do to burn 800 cal? That's pretty high.
  • ssbmacdaddy
    ssbmacdaddy Posts: 124 Member
    Options
    Thanks for all information. I will give example of typical recent day. My calorie goal is 1410 now as I am listed as sedentary. I ate 1729 food, exercised 835, net 894, had 516 calories left. It was 10 at night when finishing workout and just could not eat anything more at that hour. Do u think I'm slowing down fat loss by under eating. I figure it's all estimates and I'm leaving a cushion in case exercise was overinflated or food was under valued. Although I usually try to overinflated food and under value exercise. For instance 3 days of the week I'm standing 8 hours a day and on my feet. I googled how many calories standing burns and it's 112/hr - not a lot but it collects. I did not want to say I was lightly active as 4 days a week I am more sedentary yet I do exercise daily which I include in calculations. Most standing days I do not include standing in the calculations. What do u think I should do?

    Don't add standing. What exercise do you do to burn 800 cal? That's pretty high.

    first I want to say that if you ever try to hold anybody position for prolonged periods of time- like eight hours of standing you would know that it was isotonic. It takes a lot out of you. My original question was whether I should listed because I actually was myself as a sedentary person. When I do listed which is where I usually undercut it by a couple of hours. Meaning I am standing for eight hours and list myself only standing for six hours.

    I do 40-90 minutes of insanity workout. I listed as low impact because when they do the jumps I usually squat. This still takes a lot out of me because I am 219 pounds. I also supplement that with doing calisthenics like push-ups pull ups and squats. I alternate chest and shoulders with back legs biceps. I do 10 reps three sets for each body part. That usually takes me 20 to 30 minutes. On the weekend I may supplement walking or biking or playing basketball with the family. Yes this is on top of the exercise I mentioned above. The reason for my original question was because I recently increased intensity of my workouts. Four instance where I was modifying each type of push up on the knee, now doing full push-ups. Weight loss was more quick earlier and now it has someone slow down yet still losing just wondering if I should be eating more calorically. I usually try not to eat back on my exercise calories to have some kind of Fudge zone as both estimates for exercise and for food maybe slightly off therefore leaving a fudge zone may actually help. I am trying over the last week to eat back the majority of my exercise calories. Wondering if it will help to speed weight-loss. At this point pound a week would be even be adequate. I also realize that muscle weighs more than fat. And there is some muscle gain that I have had. Measurements are improving but I also want to see scale movement to some degree. What does the MFP community think?
  • Branstin
    Branstin Posts: 2,320 Member
    Options
    I agree that this is the best place for you to start:

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1175494-a-guide-to-get-you-started-on-your-path-to-sexypants
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,293 Member
    Options
    As a man I would argue that you should not be netting less than 1600. If you are you may want to cut back on exercise, or eat more, or a bit of both. A day here or there will not be an issue, but if everyday you are low you will experience negative side effects on health/energy etc.
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,293 Member
    Options
    Thanks for all information. I will give example of typical recent day. My calorie goal is 1410 now as I am listed as sedentary. I ate 1729 food, exercised 835, net 894, had 516 calories left. It was 10 at night when finishing workout and just could not eat anything more at that hour. Do u think I'm slowing down fat loss by under eating. I figure it's all estimates and I'm leaving a cushion in case exercise was overinflated or food was under valued. Although I usually try to overinflated food and under value exercise. For instance 3 days of the week I'm standing 8 hours a day and on my feet. I googled how many calories standing burns and it's 112/hr - not a lot but it collects. I did not want to say I was lightly active as 4 days a week I am more sedentary yet I do exercise daily which I include in calculations. Most standing days I do not include standing in the calculations. What do u think I should do?

    Don't add standing. What exercise do you do to burn 800 cal? That's pretty high.

    first I want to say that if you ever try to hold anybody position for prolonged periods of time- like eight hours of standing you would know that it was isotonic. It takes a lot out of you. My original question was whether I should listed because I actually was myself as a sedentary person. When I do listed which is where I usually undercut it by a couple of hours. Meaning I am standing for eight hours and list myself only standing for six hours.

    95% of the cals from standing you would have burned sitting or moving/twitching etc, anyway and would be taken into account in your activity level.
  • dlwhite1022
    dlwhite1022 Posts: 5
    Options
    This is all very interesting to me as I recently went from 1580 calories per day to 1280, but I am just flat out HUNGRY! I work out 3-4 times per week for 30-40 minutes, mostly walking/running or if indoors, recumbent bike. I also do some weight lifiting. I lost weight, but not always a pound per week, sometimes nothing and other weeks a total of 4 pounds, but then I picked up 4 pounds within 4 days. Maybe it's the scale I am using? I'm just not making a lof of progress and still playing around with this. Oh, and I am 5'7" and currently at about 175. When I started out about 7 weeks ago, I was at 185.
  • ssbmacdaddy
    ssbmacdaddy Posts: 124 Member
    Options
    Thanks for all information. I will give example of typical recent day. My calorie goal is 1410 now as I am listed as sedentary. I ate 1729 food, exercised 835, net 894, had 516 calories left. It was 10 at night when finishing workout and just could not eat anything more at that hour. Do u think I'm slowing down fat loss by under eating. I figure it's all estimates and I'm leaving a cushion in case exercise was overinflated or food was under valued. Although I usually try to overinflated food and under value exercise. For instance 3 days of the week I'm standing 8 hours a day and on my feet. I googled how many calories standing burns and it's 112/hr - not a lot but it collects. I did not want to say I was lightly active as 4 days a week I am more sedentary yet I do exercise daily which I include in calculations. Most standing days I do not include standing in the calculations. What do u think I should do?

    Don't add standing. What exercise do you do to burn 800 cal? That's pretty high.

    first I want to say that if you ever try to hold anybody position for prolonged periods of time- like eight hours of standing you would know that it was isotonic. It takes a lot out of you. My original question was whether I should listed because I actually was myself as a sedentary person. When I do listed which is where I usually undercut it by a couple of hours. Meaning I am standing for eight hours and list myself only standing for six hours.

    95% of the cals from standing you would have burned sitting or moving/twitching etc, anyway and would be taken into account in your activity level.

    My question was if I should include it as I do not most of the time but I list myself as sedentary in fitness goals in settings. I do this so I can alter as from day to day my activity level varies at work vs home. By most peoples standards I am light to moderate activity level at least 4 days a week. I wanted to be more controlling and mark anytime I'm active in different ways. I looked up how much standing burns and marked that- also I reduced the calories a bit. I usually try to undervalue exercise and overvalue food. I figure calories in and calories out. Should burn more then consume to loose weight. If I'm Hungary I have to earn the calories with exercise. What is the mfp community opinion?

Categories