1,200 calories

mynameisuntz
mynameisuntz Posts: 582 Member
edited October 11 in Food and Nutrition
Can someone clear this up for me? Why is 1,200 calories the MINIMUM amount of calories anyone should eat in a day? I hear everyone say, "just don't go below 1,200 calories."

Why 1,200 calories? Where did that come from?
«1

Replies

  • mapexdrummer69
    mapexdrummer69 Posts: 445
    I believe that is the amount that MFP sets for "starvation mode".
  • mynameisuntz
    mynameisuntz Posts: 582 Member
    I believe that is the amount that MFP sets for "starvation mode".
    Hrm...

    Does it take into account weight, specifically lean body mass, or anything? Or is that a universal level, like everyone's body will see 1,200 as the minimum amount of calories before going into "starvation mode?"
  • pedalpusher5
    pedalpusher5 Posts: 39
    Actually it is the amount specified by the American Medical Society for Sports Medicine (AMSSM) as the minimum amount needed to meet nutritional and energy needs based on their research. MFP probably just set the number at that because they were following those guidelines.
  • Mateo1985
    Mateo1985 Posts: 153
    1200 is of course generic. But it's true in 95% cases thou. 1200 calories is the minimum an average human body needs to run its self properly.
  • Fabnover40Kat
    Fabnover40Kat Posts: 300 Member
    I read an article by Jillian she says never go below 1200 cals!!!
  • ivansmomma
    ivansmomma Posts: 500
    I agree with the above posters. The only time anyone should go below 1200 is under a doctor's care, and I believe that would be a rare instance as well.
  • TigersLions
    TigersLions Posts: 34
    I heard during one of my work's health presentations that 1,200 was an "old" number. It should really be 1,500 (for a female). When I first started MFP, it was just to check it out. I set myself up and it assigned me 1,200 calories a day. I wonder if I need to switch to 1,500 so that my body isn't thinking it's starving and not letting any more fat go. I'm not sure how to do it in MFP though.
  • trianaw
    trianaw Posts: 177
    1200 calories is a good number of calories if you do absolutely nothing. But if you workout you'll be starving if you consume less. Some days my calorie burn is 1200. No I don't eat 2400. But I do "try" to make smart choices & plan my meals. Because I do need extra food. So I try to eat more often more filling items like apples & nuts. I hope that helps. Please don't eat less than 1000 because not only will you go into starvation mode your body will hold onto it & you will gain weight. Also drink water constantly helps tremendously.
  • mynameisuntz
    mynameisuntz Posts: 582 Member
    1200 is of course generic. But it's true in 95% cases thou. 1200 calories is the minimum an average human body needs to run its self properly.
    Where did you hear that?

    If someone's BMR is 1,600 and another person's BMR is 2,200 - do you see a discrepancy in saying, "1,200 is the absolute minimum"?

    *Assuming we care about preventing muscle loss, of course. Should explicitly state that.
  • HelloKittyRx
    HelloKittyRx Posts: 21
    It is also a good idea to take a multivitamin when you are only eating 1200 calories to make sure you get all the nutrients you need
  • misscfe
    misscfe Posts: 295 Member
    Anything under 1000 calories requires Dr supervision. There actually are cases where a person can go below 1200 but not less then 1000 but I think 1200 is pretty average. I went and did metabolic testing at my gym to figure out what my minimum should really be in order to achieve my goals.
  • Fabnover40Kat
    Fabnover40Kat Posts: 300 Member
    I read an article by Jillian she says never go below 1200 cals!!!

    http://www.jillianmichaels.com/fitness-and-diet-tips/quit-yo-yo-dieting
  • mapexdrummer69
    mapexdrummer69 Posts: 445
    I believe that is the amount that MFP sets for "starvation mode".
    Hrm...

    Does it take into account weight, specifically lean body mass, or anything? Or is that a universal level, like everyone's body will see 1,200 as the minimum amount of calories before going into "starvation mode?"


    No clue...I don't use MFP to determine calorie or macro intake. Lol.
  • mynameisuntz
    mynameisuntz Posts: 582 Member
    No clue...I don't use MFP to determine calorie or macro intake. Lol.
    I think I knew that, just figured I'd throw the question out there :P

    I simply find it odd saying, "1,200 is the minimum" when a man with 50 pounds more lean mass than a woman will have different minimal requirements.
  • bethrs
    bethrs Posts: 664 Member
    Yes, you are right, maybe 1,200 is the "absolute 0" of the calorie world. (I don't believe this). But my point is, the guy with all the lean muscle mass would likely have a HIGHER minimum than the other person. Maybe 1200 is the minimum for even tiny people.... but yeah, it's an arbitrary number probably.
  • mynameisuntz
    mynameisuntz Posts: 582 Member
    Yes, you are right, maybe 1,200 is the "absolute 0" of the calorie world. (I don't believe this). But my point is, the guy with all the lean muscle mass would likely have a HIGHER minimum than the other person. Maybe 1200 is the minimum for even tiny people.... but yeah, it's an arbitrary number probably.
    Precisely what I'm getting at!

    Am I to believe that my body's minimum requirements will be the same as my mother? She's absolutely tiny at 115 pounds ~18% body fat, where as I'm 185 pounds at ~14% body fat.
  • Jessika616
    Jessika616 Posts: 41
    I read this article the other day and wpit was extremely interesting,


    http://www.experiencelifemag.com/issues/june-2011/healthy-eating/food-crazy.php
  • bookwormie
    bookwormie Posts: 32 Member
    I was actually wondering about the 1200 calories myself. I'm female and only 4'11". Am I really supposed to be eating 1200 calories every day? Or is this an average amount based on taller people? It seems like a lot to me, but maybe that's why I'm borderline obese. It's so hard to know what's correct, and what we're supposed to be doing.
  • mynameisuntz
    mynameisuntz Posts: 582 Member
    I was actually wondering about the 1200 calories myself. I'm female and only 4'11". Am I really supposed to be eating 1200 calories every day? Or is this an average amount based on taller people? It seems like a lot to me, but maybe that's why I'm borderline obese. It's so hard to know what's correct, and what we're supposed to be doing.
    Depends on your personal maintenance calories. It's a very individualized number.
  • TourThePast
    TourThePast Posts: 1,753 Member
    I simply find it odd saying, "1,200 is the minimum" when a man with 50 pounds more lean mass than a woman will have different minimal requirements.
    1200 is the minimum for a woman, the minimum figure is 1500 for men.

    1200 is generally agreed to be the minimum required for an average woman to consume the daily nutrients that her body needs to function healthily. However, while this site uses 1200 as a minimum for all women, it's certainly not a one size fits all figure, if you are extremely short like me your minimum requirements can be met by a smaller number of calories and if you're very tall, you simply cannot get the nutrients you need in those 1200 calories.

    Plus of course there is no guarantee that if you eat 1200 calories of junk food you're getting what you need. There are many people who eat double that 1200 calories and yet have an inadequate diet, nutritionally speaking.
  • sdtul
    sdtul Posts: 24
    I laugh at the concept of 'starvation mode', if you eat below 12oo you're body will think it's starving and hold onto stored fat. Simply a myth. If you eat that little you will lose weight, but your body will suffer. 12oo cals is the min of what a body needs per day to function. If you eat very low calories for an extended period of time you will have problems such a fatigue, not being able to fight off illness, and in sever cases (think anorexia) you will lose muscle mass.
  • Mateo1985
    Mateo1985 Posts: 153
    I simply find it odd saying, "1,200 is the minimum" when a man with 50 pounds more lean mass than a woman will have different minimal requirements.
    1200 is the minimum for a woman, the minimum figure is 1500 for men.

    1200 is generally agreed to be the minimum required for an average woman to consume the daily nutrients that her body needs to function healthily. However, while this site uses 1200 as a minimum for all women, it's certainly not a one size fits all figure, if you are extremely short like me your minimum requirements can be met by a smaller number of calories and if you're very tall, you simply cannot get the nutrients you need in those 1200 calories.

    Plus of course there is no guarantee that if you eat 1200 calories of junk food you're getting what you need. There are many people who eat double that 1200 calories and yet have an inadequate diet, nutritionally speaking.


    I'm no educated nutritionist by any means to give dieting advise but I would have to agree with "1200 is the minimum for a woman, the minimum figure is 1500 for men"
  • mynameisuntz
    mynameisuntz Posts: 582 Member
    1200 is generally agreed to be the minimum required for an average woman to consume the daily nutrients that her body needs to function healthily. However, while this site uses 1200 as a minimum for all women, it's certainly not a one size fits all figure, if you are extremely short like me your minimum requirements can be met by a smaller number of calories and if you're very tall, you simply cannot get the nutrients you need in those 1200 calories.

    Plus of course there is no guarantee that if you eat 1200 calories of junk food you're getting what you need. There are many people who eat double that 1200 calories and yet have an inadequate diet, nutritionally speaking.
    How do you define "function healthily"? Because you could eat enough micronutrients to keep your body happy on that front in far less than 1,200 calories. Anything less than maintenance would be compensated by body fat depending on the body fat composition of the individual.
  • ashley_jorah
    ashley_jorah Posts: 71 Member
    This 1200 is based on aspects of our bodies that are out of our control. For example, the calories needed for your internal organs to work properly. You body does not want to have to break down stores to run it's more basic functions. The 1200 is NOT assuming you don't want to lose muscle. The 1200 has nothing to do with how active you are. Since most people have the same basic chemistry inside, they will need the same "basic" amount of fuel, even if the people are different in size. (of course there will be exceptions, but fewer than you think)
    I have seen more real scientific data supporting the starvation mode theory than the opposite. But it's essentially my choice to try to make sure I eat a minimum of 1200 calories. And it's been working for me. Do what works for you. But you can't convince me all the scientists are wrong about starvation mode.
  • mynameisuntz
    mynameisuntz Posts: 582 Member
    This 1200 is based on aspects of our bodies that are out of our control. For example, the calories needed for your internal organs to work properly. You body does not want to have to break down stores to run it's more basic functions. The 1200 is NOT assuming you don't want to lose muscle. The 1200 has nothing to do with how active you are. Since most people have the same basic chemistry inside, they will need the same "basic" amount of fuel, even if the people are different in size. (of course there will be exceptions, but fewer than you think)
    I have seen more real scientific data supporting the starvation mode theory than the opposite. But it's essentially my choice to try to make sure I eat a minimum of 1200 calories. And it's been working for me. Do what works for you. But you can't convince me all the scientists are wrong about starvation mode.
    Did any of that scientific data state WHEN the body would break down essential organs/tissue? If someone has high amounts of body fat, will the body at any point in time start metabolizing heart tissue until that body fat is essentially gone? Does someone with 30% body fat have to worry about their heart tissue being broken down if they eat 800 calories for 2 months?
  • Barneystinson
    Barneystinson Posts: 1,357 Member
    1200 is generally agreed to be the minimum required for an average woman to consume the daily nutrients that her body needs to function healthily. However, while this site uses 1200 as a minimum for all women, it's certainly not a one size fits all figure, if you are extremely short like me your minimum requirements can be met by a smaller number of calories and if you're very tall, you simply cannot get the nutrients you need in those 1200 calories.

    Plus of course there is no guarantee that if you eat 1200 calories of junk food you're getting what you need. There are many people who eat double that 1200 calories and yet have an inadequate diet, nutritionally speaking.
    How do you define "function healthily"? Because you could eat enough micronutrients to keep your body happy on that front in far less than 1,200 calories. Anything less than maintenance would be compensated by body fat depending on the body fat composition of the individual.

    That's where the lean body mass equations to determine BMR come in. BMR increases as body fat % decreases.
  • ashley_jorah
    ashley_jorah Posts: 71 Member
    This 1200 is based on aspects of our bodies that are out of our control. For example, the calories needed for your internal organs to work properly. You body does not want to have to break down stores to run it's more basic functions. The 1200 is NOT assuming you don't want to lose muscle. The 1200 has nothing to do with how active you are. Since most people have the same basic chemistry inside, they will need the same "basic" amount of fuel, even if the people are different in size. (of course there will be exceptions, but fewer than you think)
    I have seen more real scientific data supporting the starvation mode theory than the opposite. But it's essentially my choice to try to make sure I eat a minimum of 1200 calories. And it's been working for me. Do what works for you. But you can't convince me all the scientists are wrong about starvation mode.
    Did any of that scientific data state WHEN the body would break down essential organs/tissue? If someone has high amounts of body fat, will the body at any point in time start metabolizing heart tissue until that body fat is essentially gone? Does someone with 30% body fat have to worry about their heart tissue being broken down if they eat 800 calories for 2 months?

    I personally haven't seen that data.
    But at 800 calories for two months, I would make sure I was being monitored by a doctor to ensure I wasn't doing damage to myself. If I was given the all clear by a real legitmate health professional/doctor, i would do it. There's a reason they went to school for so long..they more than we do and they know how to check that we're okay.
  • mynameisuntz
    mynameisuntz Posts: 582 Member
    That's where the lean body mass equations to determine BMR come in. BMR increases as body fat % decreases.
    Where did you hear that BMR goes up as body fat goes down? Typically when calculating BMR it goes up as body weight goes up, more LBM than body fat, but still.
  • mynameisuntz
    mynameisuntz Posts: 582 Member
    I personally haven't seen that data.
    But at 800 calories for two months, I would make sure I was being monitored by a doctor to ensure I wasn't doing damage to myself. If I was given the all clear by a real legitmate health professional/doctor, i would do it. There's a reason they went to school for so long..they more than we do and they know how to check that we're okay.
    Most doctors actually know very little about nutrition as their curriculum does not force them to learn about it. And interestingly, the qualifications to be a nutritionist don't force you to look at updated empirical research, but rather textbooks.

    It's kind of a poor academic environment.
  • Barneystinson
    Barneystinson Posts: 1,357 Member
    That's where the lean body mass equations to determine BMR come in. BMR increases as body fat % decreases.
    Where did you hear that BMR goes up as body fat goes down? Typically when calculating BMR it goes up as body weight goes up, more LBM than body fat, but still.

    Katch-McArdle or Cunningham formulas assume this. It's assuming lean body mass requires a higher calorie load to sustain.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories