1200 cals is just fine. 1100 is just fine too. If....

If you are using that site, I noticed their Mifflin, St. Jeor calulation is not working properly, it was saying my BMR was 682 or some crazy thing like that (my BMR is almost double that, and yes, I am sure).

I like Harris-Benedict personally, but I lost a bunch of weight eating 1000 calories a day, netting 700-800 most days and I am 5' 2". That was fine for the first 30 lbs., but then I realized I had been lucky not having more muscle loss (you know you lose 30% of your muscle (on average) when you lose weight right?) Up until that point I had been pretty lucky (according to the Tanita at my diet place anyway, and not lost too much muscle, but I knew it was time to focus on that). I started doing T-Tapp at 30 lbs. down, then I also started doing Pilates at 35 lbs. down, and at 41 lbs. down i started lifting weights.

So this is just my opinion, but here is how I feel about it. Yes, you can drop weight fast, but if you don't eat well (you have that right with the protein) and do resistance and strength training (too much cardio and you will lose muscle) say goodbye to your muscle.

It takes like a year of hard work for a lot of these people on here to gain like 10 lbs. of muscle, and they are lifting heavy. I think minimizing muscle loss is just as important as losing fat, especially as you get older.

I am not losing as fast these days, I eat around 1300 to 1400 and even up to 1500 gross, even went over that one day (but I burned close to 700 calories, so even if you take half that..., but I am always trying to keep my net over 1000 or at least at it, and I still wonder if I am eating enough). When I look in my mirror I see a body that is more and more muscular and more and more toned...THAT is what I want to look like, I have no desire to be skinny fat.

The urgency for me in the beginning was to get out of the obese range, but once I achieved that and was safely out of it, I knew it was time to change focus. What started me on this journey was health, my blood sugar went over 100 for the first time and I knew things needed to change. What is keeping going on this journey is health, but I also have a vision of looking great in a bikini. I am not going to get there just eating at a deficit, but every time I look in the mirror these days, my abs look better and better.

If think if I want to work out and get healthy, then I have to give my body the nutrition to support that.

okay well then...at 30lbs a TDEE-20% deficet is too high...sorry...

1/2lb a week is a good healthy rate of loss for 30lbs...so that is TDEE-10%

This. A lot of the shorter/slimmer people here who are already at a healthy weight (or near enough) seem to think they can eat at a big deficit like those who are severely overweight.

The smaller you are the less of a deficit you should have. Just because you can choose the -2lbs a weeks option doesnt mean it is the best thing for you to do.

On the flip side those who are very obese should still have more than 1200 a day in order to get the fuel and nutrition needed for their bigger bodies. When I first started I was losing 2lbs a week on 2100 calories, I definately should not have gone down as low as 1200. Imagine the lean muscle that would have been stripped off me!

1200 may be 'fine' for some people but giving a blanket 'yes' is just as silly as giving a blanket 'no' dont you think?

Not true

Very short and tiny here and lose at 1600 a day. Only lightly active as well, with thyroid (medical) issues.

I tend not to support WLS?low cal/medical conditions as an excuse to take short cuts.

OP you are short cutting yourself.

Adjust your numbers to lose .25 lbs. You have all the time in the world to do so and your body and mind will thank you for it.

What was it exactly that you were disagreeing with?

I said a lot not all.

okay well then...at 30lbs a TDEE-20% deficet is too high...sorry...

1/2lb a week is a good healthy rate of loss for 30lbs...so that is TDEE-10%

This. A lot of the shorter/slimmer people here who are already at a healthy weight (or near enough) seem to think they can eat at a big deficit like those who are severely overweight.

The smaller you are the less of a deficit you should have. Just because you can choose the -2lbs a weeks option doesnt mean it is the best thing for you to do.

On the flip side those who are very obese should still have more than 1200 a day in order to get the fuel and nutrition needed for their bigger bodies. When I first started I was losing 2lbs a week on 2100 calories, I definately should not have gone down as low as 1200. Imagine the lean muscle that would have been stripped off me!

1200 may be 'fine' for some people but giving a blanket 'yes' is just as silly as giving a blanket 'no' dont you think?

Not true

Very short and tiny here and lose at 1600 a day. Only lightly active as well, with thyroid (medical) issues.

I tend not to support WLS?low cal/medical conditions as an excuse to take short cuts.

OP you are short cutting yourself.

Adjust your numbers to lose .25 lbs. You have all the time in the world to do so and your body and mind will thank you for it.

What was it exactly that you were disagreeing with?

I said a lot not all.

1200 is the bare minimum for women...period...and at those levels if you are not very very careful you are missing out on a lot of macro/micro nutrients...period...and it doesn't matter how much weight you lose, you are losing a lot more than fat...

Not sure why you felt the need to post this...it is common knowledge that the AMA says that in order to get in all your macro/micros you need at least 1200...and the fact you mention starvation mode...really?

I can get everything I need in less than 1000 calories with a multivitamin. But it's a serious feat of meal engineering. And if this is the concern, then I'd be willing to bet my last dollar that the majority of people on this forum and in this country in general are not meeting all of the required minimums even when they're eating 3000 calories a day.

I agree with op. The magic number of 1,200 calories a day is a myth.

Your body shouldn't have to "get used" to the small amount of calories you are intaking. Decreasing your calories slows your metabolism. Obviously there needs to be a deficit, but not that much. The magic number is not a myth, your metabolism will stop at some point due to starvation. Starvation doesn't actually feel like you are starving, but you will find at some time you will think you are plateauing and actually your metabolism has just stopped and you won't be able to lose any more fat and will be burning muscle instead. Take it from personal experience.

1100 calories is perfectly acceptable. After all, breakfast is the most important meal of the day.

right, well, you do that.. i eat more than double that and lift weight.. get my macros in and i am also doing awesome. I used to do this, then i realized i was fooling myself. Now i eat alllllllllllll day long and i am building muscle.
I am 5ft1

THANK YOU OP!!!! I am 5 feet tall and YES, I eat between 1000 and 1200 daily and workout. I am NOT starving and my weight loss numbers prove I know what I am doing! I eat when I am hungry NOT when the clock says its time! What I do works for me...it does not work for everybody. Some people are very judgmental if you don't do it their way. Well, I tried their way and I gained! My way works for me. This is an individual process. I have gone from wearing a 20wp to a 4/6p.

Hungry? That is what exercise is for. If you exercise for an hour a day, you can add a few hundred extra calories and have an extra meal! Also, the weight loss part of your new lifestyle doesn't last forever: when you get to maintenance and/or increase your activity level, you can eat more. Weight loss doesn't last forever... unless YOU ARE SHORT AND EATING OVER 1200 CALORIES!

WAT? This is an incredibly unhealthy way to look at exercise and weight loss in general. I seriously hope no one chooses to listen to you.