Would you drop to 900 calories per day at your doctors advice?

Heck no! Just try changing some of your food choices to break the plateau.

My thought is that the Doctor probably doesn't believe you are actually only eating 1200 calories and not losing weight.
Did you show him/her your food diary?

Unless there is somebody on here with a medical license, I would listen to your doctor. Or get a second opinion (from a doctor . . . not from the internet). Yeah, it sounds pretty severe, though.

Here's where I'm guessing he's coming from:

Nobody can accurately log food. I know there are people who weigh everything, etc. But all you have to do is search for "apple" in the MFP database and look at the wide range of nutrition info to know that there is no way that your calorie log is perfectly accurate. In fact, I read a study a while back where NUTRITIONISTS were asked to log their food, and NONE of them could do it with less than about 15% error, and they were, in general, low. The NUTRITIONISTS were eating 15% more calories than they were logging!!! (Non-nutritionists, like you and I, were more like 25% low, even when they weighed all their food, etc) So, while you THINK you are eating 1200 calories, the reality is that you are probably eating a couple hundred more than that. Your doctor probably thinks that, based on your plateau, your 1200 number is inaccurate. So, when the doctor says to cut to 900 calories, what he really MEANS is to cut 25% out of whatever you are eating.

Of course, I am not a doctor, and I don't even play one on TV. My suggestion would be to follow medical advice, or get a second (medical) opinion.

sijomial wrote: »

My thought is that the Doctor probably doesn't believe you are actually only eating 1200 calories and not losing weight.
Did you show him/her your food diary?

That's exactly what I was thinking.

I'm short as well and, after I lost 20 lbs, I stalled out as well. I had to drop to 1100 and then 1050 calories per day (and not eat back my exercise calories) to start losing weight again. It all depends on multiple factors -- your age, your height, your activity level, and how much you have to lose. If 900 cal/day seems too drastic, maybe start with 1100 and go from there until you figure out what works for you. You can eat 1000 cal/day and still be healthy.

900 calories is ridiculously low unless you are under the care of a physician who is monitoring this regularly. And it shouldn't be followed for very long. I still think it is a bit extreme. Are you sure you are eating only 1200 calories? Do you weigh (not measure) and log EVERYTHING? Do you have cheat days/meals you count? If you are honestly eating only 1200 calories you should try to eat more...yep eat more. You can cut for so long you could stop losing. Based on your current stats you could eat 1400 calories a day and still lose weight (more if you are exercising). I commend you on your weight loss up to now, but would caution the 900 cal diet.

No, I'd take a break and reverse diet back up to where your maintenance should be...hang out there for a bit and then cut again.

Would you even be comfortable eating that few calories a day? That's only 300 calories per meal and no snacks.

IMO, if I had to cut that low it would end up with me eating everything in sight within a couple days - complete opposite of what's trying to be accomplished.

How did you lose 57lbs? Has anything changed since you lost that? Changed exercise? What you eat?

All the people saying you're clearly eating more than 1200 seem to have skipped over the bit where you've lost 57lbs. Obviously your logging was great and then all,of a sudden you're eating more than you think. Yep, you'll have to adjust your calories for the weight loss you've had, but unless you're really sedentary then 900 calories is too low.

I'm taller than you, but I eat 1600+ to lose, but I am very active.

No...

Ever since a doctor told me to go on a 1200 calorie diet, I have 0 faith in what an MD has to say about nutrition.

Yeah, if you're strength training, and not sleeping and also working? Don't drop your calories.

I would do what cwolfman suggested, with the caveat of making sure that you're tracking diligently. Your body might be ready for a refeed after dieting for so long.

I think I'd seek a second (professional) opinion.

Yes, as the body of evidence supports use of low calorie diets for defined periods (a few weeks) in obesity. It's a standard medical recommendation in the UK, for obese people, and we don't have 1200 calories as a perceived minimum.

I would not, not without at least trying other things first. Those saying you should follow the doctor's advice seem to be ignoring the fact that you aren't in a medically-supervised weight-loss program, there aren't dire medical reasons to lose fast, and there's no indication the doctor is an expert on weight loss. I also suspect that the doctor just assumes that your calorie estimate is off, as that's common.

whatatime2befit wrote: »

Are you sure you are eating only 1200 calories? Do you weigh (not measure) and log EVERYTHING? Do you have cheat days/meals you count?

I've been at this a while, and have lost quite a bit. I'm not going to say my tracking is absolutely perfect (because there are times I can't measure/weigh), but I think it's pretty good. I track everything, so no cheat meals that aren't counted (I don't believe anything is a cheat btw, if you track everything).

How has your rate of loss been? Consistent with what you would expect to lose at 1200 with your stats over time? Did the loss slow down gradually or simply stop one week. How long have you been stalled? The 4-5 months, or is this the time period over which it was slowing down?

I'd focus on the logging/prior results to be certain that my calories were correct and consistent, and if your loss before was slower than might have been predicted with the calories you were on, that might be evidence that you were underestimating some. There could be some water retention from adding lifting, but it's been long enough that that should be gone. Plateaus do happen, so being consistent might be an option, but once I was comfortable that it was something other than gradual slow down due to lost weight and that my logging was on point, I'd probably try something like the reverse diet approach cwolfman mentioned. Or maybe play around with different carb approaches, as mentioned by others.