Tips on adjusting to 1200 calories per day?
Options
Replies
-
MamaBirdBoss wrote: »malavika413 wrote: »MamaBirdBoss wrote: »malavika413 wrote: »malavika413 wrote: »TheVirgoddess wrote: »malavika413 wrote: »TheVirgoddess wrote: »My first recommendation is to log - everything - for a few weeks. Get an idea of what you're actually eating, and then you can figure out where you should be.
If you do decide to drop down to 1200 (unnecessary, IMO) - eat your exercise calories back.
I did log everything for over a month, no loss. And I burn off quite a few exercise calories (on vacation now, but on the average day I walk about 4 miles), so I feel like eating those back wouldn't help much.
Then my next suggestion is to weigh your food.
I really don't want my roommates to try and stage an intervention again. Would being more strict about not eating back exercise calories not work?
so your roommates run your life???
if you are not losing it is because you are not logging accurately due to overestimating of calories.
also, if you were eating 100% back of exercise calories that is part of the problem too. I would suggest getting afoot scale and only eating back half of your exercise calories.
if you don't log accurately on 1200 then you won't lose either.
I'm planning not to eat my exercise calories so I'll have a buffer. I log and measure all the food I can, so I'm guessing 450 extra exercise calories would cover that.
You're not exercising, though. What you're describing is probably going to JUST top off your calories for a sedentary lifestyle.
10,000 steps gets me just to 1700 calories.
And I'm taller than you, so I get more credit. 1700-1200=500, a one-pound-a-week deficit.
That's why I work out extra. I want more calories!
Jesus, I'm already tired with this.
If you walk fast, you'll burn a lot more. Mine is a pretty slow walk because I'm usually typing/working.
I'll try that. I'm already pretty tired after the walk, though.0 -
And lots of teens today are very sedentary. There's a kid in the neighborhood who can't make it around the block without huffing and puffing (and he's not obese, just very, very sedentary). Your fitness improves in time.
You could try doing Couch to 5k. There's a free app. It will get you a LOT more calories than walking!0 -
malavika413 wrote: »MamaBirdBoss wrote: »malavika413 wrote: »MamaBirdBoss wrote: »malavika413 wrote: »malavika413 wrote: »TheVirgoddess wrote: »malavika413 wrote: »TheVirgoddess wrote: »My first recommendation is to log - everything - for a few weeks. Get an idea of what you're actually eating, and then you can figure out where you should be.
If you do decide to drop down to 1200 (unnecessary, IMO) - eat your exercise calories back.
I did log everything for over a month, no loss. And I burn off quite a few exercise calories (on vacation now, but on the average day I walk about 4 miles), so I feel like eating those back wouldn't help much.
Then my next suggestion is to weigh your food.
I really don't want my roommates to try and stage an intervention again. Would being more strict about not eating back exercise calories not work?
so your roommates run your life???
if you are not losing it is because you are not logging accurately due to overestimating of calories.
also, if you were eating 100% back of exercise calories that is part of the problem too. I would suggest getting afoot scale and only eating back half of your exercise calories.
if you don't log accurately on 1200 then you won't lose either.
I'm planning not to eat my exercise calories so I'll have a buffer. I log and measure all the food I can, so I'm guessing 450 extra exercise calories would cover that.
You're not exercising, though. What you're describing is probably going to JUST top off your calories for a sedentary lifestyle.
10,000 steps gets me just to 1700 calories. And I'm taller than you, so I get more credit. 1700-1200=500, a one-pound-a-week deficit.
That's why I work out extra. I want more calories!
Jesus, I'm already tired with this.
If you walk fast, you'll burn a lot more. Mine is a pretty slow walk because I'm usually typing/working.
I'll try that. I'm already pretty tired after the walk, though.
Couch to 5k will get you there. 0 -
MamaBirdBoss wrote: »And lots of teens today are very sedentary. There's a kid in the neighborhood who can't make it around the block without huffing and puffing (and he's not obese, just very, very sedentary). Your fitness improves in time.
You could try doing Couch to 5k. There's a free app. It will get you a LOT more calories than walking!
I've thought about it. Anything to lose weight, I guess. I figured eating less would be easier.0 -
Yikes. Cognitive dissonance!MamaBirdBoss wrote: »
It's not, though, for our heights and weights. TRUST me on this one. Or go check out my daily calorie goals, and I'll tell you how much I walked that day!!!MamaBirdBoss wrote: »10,000 steps gets me just to 1700 calories. And I'm taller than you, so I get more credit. 1700-1200=500, a one-pound-a-week deficit.
That's why I work out extra. I want more calories!
While I agree with most of what you've said... 10,000 steps is supposed to be well above lightly active, verging on active. And you certainly sound more along the lines of active than lightly active when you add the rest of it! Of course, in the end, the scale trumps any estimates!
1955 calories with 20,195 steps so far today. Projected burn of 2106.
1683 is my expected calories for sedentary.
1,890 is lightly active.
2,150 is active.
On Wednesday, I walked just over 15,000 steps. No other exercise. Burn of 1,900 even.
So I have to walk 15,000 steps to be "lightly active" and 20k steps to be "active."
I actually think that the Fitbit's TDEE estimate is fairly accurate, so if it takes 15,000 steps to match the MFP lightly active setting... then that's what it takes!
My Fitbit TDEE matches the MFP "very active" setting TDEE at about 15.5K to 16K (pretty much all of them are "purposeful for exercise")
Hence the dissonance!0 -
MamaBirdBoss wrote: »MamaBirdBoss wrote: »10,000 steps gets me just to 1700 calories. And I'm taller than you, so I get more credit. 1700-1200=500, a one-pound-a-week deficit.
That's why I work out extra. I want more calories!
While I agree with most of what you've said... 10,000 steps is supposed to be well above lightly active, verging on active. And you certainly sound more along the lines of active than lightly active when you add the rest of it! Of course, in the end, the scale trumps any estimates!
It's not, though, for our heights and weights. TRUST me on this one. Or go check out my daily calorie goals, and I'll tell you how much I walked that day!!!
1955 calories with 20,195 steps so far today. Projected burn of 2106.
1683 is my expected calories for sedentary.
1,890 is lightly active.
2,150 is active.
On Wednesday, I walked just over 15,000 steps. No other exercise. Burn of 1,900 even.
So I have to walk 15,000 steps to be "lightly active" and 20k steps to be "active."
Yikes. Cognitive dissonance!
I actually think that the Fitbit's TDEE estimate is fairly accurate, so if it takes 15,000 steps to match the MFP lightly active setting... then that's what it takes!
My Fitbit TDEE matches the MFP very active setting at about 15.5K to 16K (pretty much all of them are "purposeful for exercise".
Hence the dissonance!
I'm walking at a pace that's faster than ambling but slower than striding. I'm also just 5'6" (so I don't walk as far as you for the same number of steps), and I weigh 140lbs (so I get way less credit per mile).0 -
I would encourage you to check out this link and calculate your TDEE and understand what that is.
http://www.freedieting.com/tools/calorie_calculator.htm
So many people think that cutting calories to an amount that is lower is the answer but if you are already hungry, then is that really the answer? Cutting the calories more to a point that is not healthy physically or emotionally is not going to be a habit you will stick to. Also, if you teach your metabolism that you are going to give it the bare bones amount, it will adjust to manage energy on that amount.
I am going to be unpopular for saying this, but if you have push back on the weighing the food idea, I respect that. One of my BFF's is a psychologist and she specializes in eating disorders. She says MFP is not the healthiest place for anyone with ED tendencies. As you mentioned, your roommates have already intervened and it's also not practical to tote a scale around. But you could consider learning the visuals of how much is what - that would help.
http://www.healthyeating.org/Portals/0/Documents/Schools/Parent Ed/Portion_Sizes_Serving_Chart.pdf
Some folks have mentioned adding strength training. If you can't afford a gym that would supply heavier weights, you can use body weight exercises and also resistance bands (<$20 on Amazon) to activate your muscles in a greater way than you do just walking. Walking is great but you will want to elevate your heart rate at least 15-20 minutes a day to a point where you are aware you are working and you have to take breaths between every few words if you were talking.
I am also a big believer in BF% over scale weight. I will add I am a fitness instructor for the past 10 years and for what I weigh now, I am 5-7 lbs heavier but with same measurements and clothing size at a BF% between 21-22%. That's what adding muscle mass will do for you. Also revs your metabolism. I eat between 1800-2000 calories a day at my exercise levels and try to stay 15% below my TDEE. I have lost 5.5 lbs very slowly (over 12 weeks) but have a goal to preserve muscle mass. I tell you this because everyone on here will have a different opinion of how YOU should get there. But it's really a process over years of educating yourself as to what works, what doesn't. I started WW at age 12 and I am now 45. I've always been in a healthy weight range for my height (at both ends of the range!) but because of my genetics, it's taken constant vigilance. I will always have to track and exercise to some degree because that works for me. You need to find what works for you.
Some websites I like are:
www.eatmore2weighless.com
www.girlsgonestrong.com
Educate yourself and you will win at this in the long term.
0 -
losingitseattle wrote: »I would encourage you to check out this link and calculate your TDEE and understand what that is.
http://www.freedieting.com/tools/calorie_calculator.htm
So many people think that cutting calories to an amount that is lower is the answer but if you are already hungry, then is that really the answer? Cutting the calories more to a point that is not healthy physically or emotionally is not going to be a habit you will stick to. Also, if you teach your metabolism that you are going to give it the bare bones amount, it will adjust to manage energy on that amount.
I am going to be unpopular for saying this, but if you have push back on the weighing the food idea, I respect that. One of my BFF's is a psychologist and she specializes in eating disorders. She says MFP is not the healthiest place for anyone with ED tendencies. As you mentioned, your roommates have already intervened and it's also not practical to tote a scale around. But you could consider learning the visuals of how much is what - that would help.
http://www.healthyeating.org/Portals/0/Documents/Schools/Parent Ed/Portion_Sizes_Serving_Chart.pdf
Some folks have mentioned adding strength training. If you can't afford a gym that would supply heavier weights, you can use body weight exercises and also resistance bands (<$20 on Amazon) to activate your muscles in a greater way than you do just walking. Walking is great but you will want to elevate your heart rate at least 15-20 minutes a day to a point where you are aware you are working and you have to take breaths between every few words if you were talking.
I am also a big believer in BF% over scale weight. I will add I am a fitness instructor for the past 10 years and for what I weigh now, I am 5-7 lbs heavier but with same measurements and clothing size at a BF% between 21-22%. That's what adding muscle mass will do for you. Also revs your metabolism. I eat between 1800-2000 calories a day at my exercise levels and try to stay 15% below my TDEE. I have lost 5.5 lbs very slowly (over 12 weeks) but have a goal to preserve muscle mass. I tell you this because everyone on here will have a different opinion of how YOU should get there. But it's really a process over years of educating yourself as to what works, what doesn't. I started WW at age 12 and I am now 45. I've always been in a healthy weight range for my height (at both ends of the range!) but because of my genetics, it's taken constant vigilance. I will always have to track and exercise to some degree because that works for me. You need to find what works for you.
Some websites I like are:
www.eatmore2weighless.com
www.girlsgonestrong.com
Educate yourself and you will win at this in the long term.
First - If OP is already not accurately tracking and not losing, then I really don't understand why you would say not to weigh all solid foods. You say she can't cut any lower, but then you say to not get a food scale and just keep inaccurately logging, sorry but that does not make any sense. Also, OP's roommate had an ED, not OP. So your theory about MFP being unhealthy for someone with ED tendencies does not apply.
Second - body fat scales are notoriously inaccurate so I don't know why you are recommending that as a tracking method.
Third - I agree on the strength training.
0 -
Im on 1200 a day. I have 0 cal tea in the morning but don't eat until I need to around 11/12. The morning is the only time I'm even semi hungry. I have a small lunch, fruit, cereal, salad, something, allow myself a few small handfuls of snacks to ride me through the rest of the day, then get to pig out (relatively speaking) for dinner.
It's not so much eating more filling foods for me, but just anything really low cal so I can have as much as I want. I'd open my diary but I've been so bad nutrition-wise this week I can't stand it
I think I was about to get an intervention from my family for weighing food, but when I explained to them it was more accurate than measuring by cups (because 1/2 cup of spinach is really hard to messure- do you press it down? Let it be fluffy? Cook it first?) and told them I do it for recipie reasons so I can have the exact same measurements for next time they were cool with it. It was only a semi-lie...0 -
She's 5'3" and 149lbs. She can weight lift all day, but she isn't going to see anything but slightly smaller dimensions for that. Recomping at 5'10" would make total sense at that weight, but not at 5'3".0
-
MamaBirdBoss wrote: »She's 5'3" and 149lbs. She can weight lift all day, but she isn't going to see anything but slightly smaller dimensions for that. Recomping at 5'10" would make total sense at that weight, but not at 5'3".
wut??????0 -
MamaBirdBoss wrote: »She's 5'3" and 149lbs. She can weight lift all day, but she isn't going to see anything but slightly smaller dimensions for that. Recomping at 5'10" would make total sense at that weight, but not at 5'3".
wut??????
Unless you're doing SERIOUS fitness-model level training, you will remain looking fluffy at 5'3" and 149lbs. The inches matter more than you might think. I would be fluffy without SERIOUS, SERIOUS training at that weight, and I'm 3" taller. I don't care to spend 5 hours a week weight training. I just don't. So I'm not recomping until I'm way lighter than that.0 -
Me at 5'6", to get a 6 pack @ three hours a week, lifting for bulk, I have to be 123lbs with clothes on.0
-
MamaBirdBoss wrote: »Me at 5'6", to get a 6 pack @ three hours a week, lifting for bulk, I have to be 123lbs with clothes on.
I have no interest in recomping anyway. I'd just like to be lighter. I get that I'm fat now.0 -
losingitseattle wrote: »I would encourage you to check out this link and calculate your TDEE and understand what that is.
http://www.freedieting.com/tools/calorie_calculator.htm
So many people think that cutting calories to an amount that is lower is the answer but if you are already hungry, then is that really the answer? Cutting the calories more to a point that is not healthy physically or emotionally is not going to be a habit you will stick to. Also, if you teach your metabolism that you are going to give it the bare bones amount, it will adjust to manage energy on that amount.
I am going to be unpopular for saying this, but if you have push back on the weighing the food idea, I respect that. One of my BFF's is a psychologist and she specializes in eating disorders. She says MFP is not the healthiest place for anyone with ED tendencies. As you mentioned, your roommates have already intervened and it's also not practical to tote a scale around. But you could consider learning the visuals of how much is what - that would help.
http://www.healthyeating.org/Portals/0/Documents/Schools/Parent Ed/Portion_Sizes_Serving_Chart.pdf
Some folks have mentioned adding strength training. If you can't afford a gym that would supply heavier weights, you can use body weight exercises and also resistance bands (<$20 on Amazon) to activate your muscles in a greater way than you do just walking. Walking is great but you will want to elevate your heart rate at least 15-20 minutes a day to a point where you are aware you are working and you have to take breaths between every few words if you were talking.
I am also a big believer in BF% over scale weight. I will add I am a fitness instructor for the past 10 years and for what I weigh now, I am 5-7 lbs heavier but with same measurements and clothing size at a BF% between 21-22%. That's what adding muscle mass will do for you. Also revs your metabolism. I eat between 1800-2000 calories a day at my exercise levels and try to stay 15% below my TDEE. I have lost 5.5 lbs very slowly (over 12 weeks) but have a goal to preserve muscle mass. I tell you this because everyone on here will have a different opinion of how YOU should get there. But it's really a process over years of educating yourself as to what works, what doesn't. I started WW at age 12 and I am now 45. I've always been in a healthy weight range for my height (at both ends of the range!) but because of my genetics, it's taken constant vigilance. I will always have to track and exercise to some degree because that works for me. You need to find what works for you.
Some websites I like are:
www.eatmore2weighless.com
www.girlsgonestrong.com
Educate yourself and you will win at this in the long term.
I can't tell what my TDEE is because I don't exercise for the sake of it. I walk a bit, but according to other posters it's not enough to be considered activity. If I called myself sedentary, my TDEE would be 1700 calories, and to lose weight I'd be eating around 1200.0 -
malavika413 wrote: »MamaBirdBoss wrote: »Me at 5'6", to get a 6 pack @ three hours a week, lifting for bulk, I have to be 123lbs with clothes on.
I have no interest in recomping anyway. I'd just like to be lighter. I get that I'm fat now.
You're not fat at all. You're just very, very slightly overweight.
The advantage to recomping is that all your activities count for more. If you weigh 130lbs and run a mile versus 120lbs and run a mile, you burn more calories heavier. So that means you get to eat more. If you can be the EXACT SAME size and 130lbs versus 120lbs, you usually would look better at the heavier weight because muscle looks less "fluffy," as you say...and then it's easier to maintain.
But...a lot of guys just have NO frame of reference for shorter women's heights and corresponding builds and start telling women to try to shift from fat to muscle while maintaining about the same weight for a better look at a much higher weight than is practical for women.
I hope that makes sense!0 -
MamaBirdBoss wrote: »malavika413 wrote: »MamaBirdBoss wrote: »Me at 5'6", to get a 6 pack @ three hours a week, lifting for bulk, I have to be 123lbs with clothes on.
I have no interest in recomping anyway. I'd just like to be lighter. I get that I'm fat now.
You're not fat at all. You're just very, very slightly overweight.
The advantage to recomping is that all your activities count for more. If you weigh 130lbs and run a mile versus 120lbs and run a mile, you burn more calories heavier. So that means you get to eat more. If you can be the EXACT SAME size and 130lbs versus 120lbs, you usually would look better at the heavier weight because muscle looks less "fluffy," as you say...and then it's easier to maintain.
But...a lot of guys just have NO frame of reference for shorter women's heights and corresponding builds and start telling women to try to shift from fat to muscle while maintaining about the same weight for a better look at a much higher weight than is practical for women.
I hope that makes sense!
I'm over ten pounds overweight, much more than that since I have a medium frame. I'd call that fat.
I don't know how I feel about recomping. I'll see how I feel about myself at 115.0 -
Here's an example: http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1272415
Look much more lean. Same weight at beginning an end.0 -
MamaBirdBoss wrote: »Here's an example: http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1272415
Look much more lean. Same weight at beginning an end.
I mean, I know all about the benefits and stuff. I just don't know if it's something I want to do for myself. Lifting heavy requires funds I don't have and energy I don't have.0 -
You can also scroll down to the 5'4" lady at 130lbs:
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1385256/advice-for-body-recomposition-ladies0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.5K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 391 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 922 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions