1200 is really difficult
Replies
-
janejellyroll wrote: »littled1986 wrote: »Not to be a paun, but if 1200 is too low mfp wouldn't give that amount. I agree that it can be too low psychologically for some that fit the stats for that number, but it's not dangerously low or anything. Now if you're not super short like us, your body obviously needs more than that.
That doesn't mean an OP has to eat that to lose weight.
We don't have to go a low as we can without being "dangerously low."
It is okay to want to lose weight while eating more than 1,200 and it is totally acceptable.
Very true. Definitely eat more calories if it's easier to sustain. Although I would suggest to try it for a week then see how it feels. If you'll binge because you feel deprived then you're just undoing all of your hard work. I also think that if you're eating the right foods it helps tremendously, but overall it's the long road that's important.0 -
I'm on a 1,200 calorie / day diet, too, and I feel your pain. One thing that's really helped me is walking for 30+ minutes. The longer I walk, the more calories I earn. If you have access to a treadmill, stationary bike, elliptical machine, etc, it's really helpful to watch TV while exercising (it makes you forget you're exercising). And the endorphins released by the exercise make you feel great (I can't emphasize enough the positive affect this has on one's state of mind) . If 1,200 is too low, then up your calorie count but eat lean meat and good vegetables. In my humble opinion, the type of food you eat is more important than keeping calories so low. I wish you all the best!0
-
dickysherman wrote: »I'm on a 1,200 calorie / day diet, too, and I feel your pain. One thing that's really helped me is walking for 30+ minutes. The longer I walk, the more calories I earn. If you have access to a treadmill, stationary bike, elliptical machine, etc, it's really helpful to watch TV while exercising (it makes you forget you're exercising). And the endorphins released by the exercise make you feel great (I can't emphasize enough the positive affect this has on one's state of mind) . If 1,200 is too low, then up your calorie count but eat lean meat and good vegetables. In my humble opinion, the type of food you eat is more important than keeping calories so low. I wish you all the best!
How's come you're eating 1200 calories as a male with 6 pounds to lose? Sorry, maybe too forward of a question.0 -
You need to eat more. There's no way you're going to be able to stick with a 1,200 calorie a day diet. I know I would starve.
http://scoobysworkshop.com/calorie-calculator/
I came up with just shy of 1,800 a day, sedentary.0 -
If you focus more on high protein foods even if you go over on your calorie goal you will find it a lot easier to loose the weight. Things like oats and beans are really good to help keep you full. It's more about what you're eating than how much. You can do it!
It's also really important to remember that MFP isn't an exact science. Everyone's body metabolizes differently and the numbers that work for others won't necessarily work for you. Just test the waters and you'll find the sweet spot that keeps you full and loosing weight. Good luck!!0 -
StarlightAria wrote: »
At work I sort mail into bins which means standing and walking around. I do this 1-2 hrs per day, does even stationary standing and little walking count?StarlightAria wrote: »Then eat more food and don't set your goal to 2lb/week.
1580 and 1830, btw, are the numbers MFP gave me right now after I created an account with your stats and selected 1lb/week. 1580 if selecting sedentary (which most people are not), and 1830 if selecting lightly active. This is without even eating back exercise calories on top of the number.
How can I tell the difference between sedentary and lightly active?
If you walk and stand at least 1-2 hours a day you're probably lightly active. I stand and walk maybe 2 hours on average max and I have to use the lightly active setting on MFP if I use neat method. Alternatively you can estimate your average activity levels on a calculator such as health-calc.com/diet/energy-expenditure-advanced or exrx.net/Calculators/CalRequire.htmland compare it to each of these two numbers. For sleeping, include any laying down you do outside of sleep. Subtract 500 calories from the number to get a comparable number to MFP.
First link gave 2160, second link gave 1900, when estimating 1hr of standing/walking (the 2nd link does not put those two together, so 1hr of walking only) and 9hrs sleeping. If you shower and cook and walk to/from your car or bus then you probably qualify as lightly active.
Yes. Honestly I'd say just choose lightly active (which most people can probably pick by default if they work a standard job), and eat back at least half of your exercise calories. If you don't lose 1lb/week on average, and if it's significantly less than 1lb/week, then try the sedentary level instead. Give whatever goal you choose at least a month to see if it's working or not, if you are new to exercising then I'd say stick it out for 2 months to bypass initial water weight gains you might experience.0 -
StarlightAria wrote: »It seems my TDEE is 1933. What do I do with that?
Where did you get that number from? MFP does not do TDEE. It does NEAT, which means it does not include your exercise. And either number should be for maintenance, so you eat up to 20% or 500 calories below maintenance. Smaller deficit = slower weight loss.0 -
littled1986 wrote: »Not to be a paun, but if 1200 is too low mfp wouldn't give that amount. I agree that it can be too low psychologically for some that fit the stats for that number, but it's not dangerously low or anything. Now if you're not super short like us, your body obviously needs more than that.
MFP is just a calculator. It goes to 1200 by default for 2lb/week. It's unnecessary for the majority of people who want to lose weight.0 -
Posting without reading the above posts. But when did you start the metformin? Ad me I would love to be support for you.0
-
Someone posted some type of calculator. Honestly I'm just confused now.0
-
Then eat more food and don't set your goal to 2lb/week.
1580 and 1830, btw, are the numbers MFP gave me right now after I created an account with your stats and selected 1lb/week. 1580 if selecting sedentary (which most people are not), and 1830 if selecting lightly active. This is without even eating back exercise calories on top of the number.
I don't see how you got these numbers. I am 5'2" and even .5 pounds per week doesn't give me 1500.
I got these numbers by entering in her stats into MFP when I created a new account and selecting 1lb/week.
Height doesn't factor into maintenance needs nearly as much as people seem to think - activity level and weight (and potentially body fat %) are what will influence maintenance needs the most.
1580 and 1830 as deficit goals based on OP's stats.
Created a 2nd account and got the exact same numbers.0 -
For maintaining or deficit? If for deficit then that's what I also get if I use the MFP lightly active goal for OP at 1lb/week, and most people are at least lightly active.You need to eat more. There's no way you're going to be able to stick with a 1,200 calorie a day diet. I know I would starve.
http://scoobysworkshop.com/calorie-calculator/
I came up with just shy of 1,800 a day, sedentary.0 -
Then eat more food and don't set your goal to 2lb/week.
1580 and 1830, btw, are the numbers MFP gave me right now after I created an account with your stats and selected 1lb/week. 1580 if selecting sedentary (which most people are not), and 1830 if selecting lightly active. This is without even eating back exercise calories on top of the number.
I don't see how you got these numbers. I am 5'2" and even .5 pounds per week doesn't give me 1500.
I got these numbers by entering in her stats into MFP when I created a new account and selecting 1lb/week.
Height doesn't factor into maintenance needs nearly as much as people seem to think - activity level and weight (and potentially body fat %) are what will influence maintenance needs the most.
1580 and 1830 as deficit goals based on OP's stats.
Created a 2nd account and got the exact same numbers.
I'm so confused now. What the H is going on here?! Does anyone know of a different online calculator to compare with?0 -
Then eat more food and don't set your goal to 2lb/week.
1580 and 1830, btw, are the numbers MFP gave me right now after I created an account with your stats and selected 1lb/week. 1580 if selecting sedentary (which most people are not), and 1830 if selecting lightly active. This is without even eating back exercise calories on top of the number.
I don't see how you got these numbers. I am 5'2" and even .5 pounds per week doesn't give me 1500.
I got these numbers by entering in her stats into MFP when I created a new account and selecting 1lb/week.
Height doesn't factor into maintenance needs nearly as much as people seem to think - activity level and weight (and potentially body fat %) are what will influence maintenance needs the most.
1580 and 1830 as deficit goals based on OP's stats.
Created a 2nd account and got the exact same numbers.
I'd be curious to know why MFP gives me different numbers then.
0 -
littled1986 wrote: »Then eat more food and don't set your goal to 2lb/week.
1580 and 1830, btw, are the numbers MFP gave me right now after I created an account with your stats and selected 1lb/week. 1580 if selecting sedentary (which most people are not), and 1830 if selecting lightly active. This is without even eating back exercise calories on top of the number.
I don't see how you got these numbers. I am 5'2" and even .5 pounds per week doesn't give me 1500.
I got these numbers by entering in her stats into MFP when I created a new account and selecting 1lb/week.
Height doesn't factor into maintenance needs nearly as much as people seem to think - activity level and weight (and potentially body fat %) are what will influence maintenance needs the most.
1580 and 1830 as deficit goals based on OP's stats.
Created a 2nd account and got the exact same numbers.
I'm so confused now. What the H is going on here?! Does anyone know of a different online calculator to compare with?
health-calc or exrx.net. Neither will be exact comparisons to MFP, as I already demonstrated on the previous page using her stats. Otherwise any TDEE calculator selecting SEDENTARY only will be potentially comparable to MFP.0 -
About a year ago when I was diagnosed. It's the lowest dose and extended release. No issues tummy wise like a lot of people.Sramsey2028 wrote: »Posting without reading the above posts. But when did you start the metformin? Ad me I would love to be support for you.
0 -
Then eat more food and don't set your goal to 2lb/week.
1580 and 1830, btw, are the numbers MFP gave me right now after I created an account with your stats and selected 1lb/week. 1580 if selecting sedentary (which most people are not), and 1830 if selecting lightly active. This is without even eating back exercise calories on top of the number.
I don't see how you got these numbers. I am 5'2" and even .5 pounds per week doesn't give me 1500.
I got these numbers by entering in her stats into MFP when I created a new account and selecting 1lb/week.
Height doesn't factor into maintenance needs nearly as much as people seem to think - activity level and weight (and potentially body fat %) are what will influence maintenance needs the most.
1580 and 1830 as deficit goals based on OP's stats.
Created a 2nd account and got the exact same numbers.
I'd be curious to know why MFP gives me different numbers then.
Me too. I'm scratching my head.0 -
Then eat more food and don't set your goal to 2lb/week.
1580 and 1830, btw, are the numbers MFP gave me right now after I created an account with your stats and selected 1lb/week. 1580 if selecting sedentary (which most people are not), and 1830 if selecting lightly active. This is without even eating back exercise calories on top of the number.
I don't see how you got these numbers. I am 5'2" and even .5 pounds per week doesn't give me 1500.
I got these numbers by entering in her stats into MFP when I created a new account and selecting 1lb/week.
Height doesn't factor into maintenance needs nearly as much as people seem to think - activity level and weight (and potentially body fat %) are what will influence maintenance needs the most.
1580 and 1830 as deficit goals based on OP's stats.
Created a 2nd account and got the exact same numbers.
I'd be curious to know why MFP gives me different numbers then.
you weigh less?0 -
I'm so confused now. What the H is going on here?! Does anyone know of a different online calculator to compare with? [/quote]
health-calc or exrx.net. Neither will be exact comparisons to MFP, as I already demonstrated on the previous page using her stats. Otherwise any TDEE calculator selecting SEDENTARY only will be potentially comparable to MFP. [/quote]
I have about the same stats as her (slightly lower sw) and I don't get the numbers you're getting. I also selected sedentary (I add in my exercise calories) I'm going to check out those other calculators.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
arditarose wrote: »Then eat more food and don't set your goal to 2lb/week.
1580 and 1830, btw, are the numbers MFP gave me right now after I created an account with your stats and selected 1lb/week. 1580 if selecting sedentary (which most people are not), and 1830 if selecting lightly active. This is without even eating back exercise calories on top of the number.
I don't see how you got these numbers. I am 5'2" and even .5 pounds per week doesn't give me 1500.
I got these numbers by entering in her stats into MFP when I created a new account and selecting 1lb/week.
Height doesn't factor into maintenance needs nearly as much as people seem to think - activity level and weight (and potentially body fat %) are what will influence maintenance needs the most.
1580 and 1830 as deficit goals based on OP's stats.
Created a 2nd account and got the exact same numbers.
I'd be curious to know why MFP gives me different numbers then.
you weigh less?
No, even when I started close to where the OP is I was given 1200 for a projected 1.1 pound per week loss (think that was the exact number, but definitely just over a pound.) Maybe my age?
0 -
-
arditarose wrote: »Then eat more food and don't set your goal to 2lb/week.
1580 and 1830, btw, are the numbers MFP gave me right now after I created an account with your stats and selected 1lb/week. 1580 if selecting sedentary (which most people are not), and 1830 if selecting lightly active. This is without even eating back exercise calories on top of the number.
I don't see how you got these numbers. I am 5'2" and even .5 pounds per week doesn't give me 1500.
I got these numbers by entering in her stats into MFP when I created a new account and selecting 1lb/week.
Height doesn't factor into maintenance needs nearly as much as people seem to think - activity level and weight (and potentially body fat %) are what will influence maintenance needs the most.
1580 and 1830 as deficit goals based on OP's stats.
Created a 2nd account and got the exact same numbers.
I'd be curious to know why MFP gives me different numbers then.
you weigh less?
No, even when I started close to where the OP is I was given 1200 for a projected 1.1 pound per week loss (think that was the exact number, but definitely just over a pound.) Maybe my age?
I dunno...0 -
Cut out all processed foods... eat as much fruits and fresh veggies as possible. If you can't pronounce the ingredients stay away...0
-
-
smarie6193 wrote: »Cut out all processed foods... eat as much fruits and fresh veggies as possible. If you can't pronounce the ingredients stay away...
oh come on. we were just starting to get somewhere.0 -
Don't input it from the app.
And that screencap shows 2lbs/week0 -
I was doing 1200 calories for 5 months and had no problems. I am now targeting 1450 because I wanted to add more fruit and nuts (for regularity). Feel free to add me as a friend and you can view my diary. I think the key is to try to get the most bang for your calorie buck. I sometimes ate less than 1200 if I woke up too late. 1200 calories doesn't allow for a lot of "treats" but that was okay for me. I assume your height and condition may be the reason for the low calorie goal. What's your TDEE? Mine was low because I knew how to work with that amount of calories and stayed away from calorie dense foods. I also ate high protein.
Edit: I meant my calorie goal was low, not my TDEE. I am very economical with my calories. Regularity was a concern because I was getting 40% of my calories from protein. I can understand wanting to lose weight faster rather than slower. I think it depends on the person. BTW, I started at 240lbs and lost 61 pounds in less than 6 months. I'm 47 and workout regularly.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
billieljaime wrote: »Your weight loss goals are to aggressive.
You want to lose what you gained in less than a quarter of the time you gained it.
Not healthy or realistic.
I see a lot of good advice listed above, head some of it.
poem?0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 423 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions