1200 calorie diets can lead to gaining or maintaining weight?
tracymn925
Posts: 21 Member
Can someone explain this argument to me? Why do people say you will lose more weight eating 1500 calories than 1200 calories? It just makes no sense.
0
Replies
-
That's because it doesn't happen. If you're gaining weight on 1200 calories (unless it's above your TDEE), you aren't eating 1200 calories0
-
That's because it doesn't happen. If you're gaining weight on 1200 calories (unless it's above your TDEE), you aren't eating 1200 calories
+1 There is no physical way for your body to lose more weight on 1500 calories than it does on 1200. I'm guessing whoever you heard this from was talking about "starvation mode," which is nonsense. The greater your deficit, the faster your rate of loss.0 -
That's because it doesn't happen. If you're gaining weight on 1200 calories (unless it's above your TDEE), you aren't eating 1200 calories
Exactly.
The only other side to that statement is that eating 1200 calories can cause one to end up binging because they're over-restricting. Due to that, it would be easier for them to lose weight on 1500 calories by avoiding constant binge cycles where they eat too little, lose weight, then gain some back with binges because they're hungry. However, those who come on the boards and say they're eating 1200 calories or less and can't lose or that they ate 1200 calories or less, didn't lose, then lost weight eating more calories are full of it. If they're being truthful, they are extremely rare cases.0 -
If there being truthful they problem don't weigh themselves enough and don't understand their weight fluctuations.0
-
That's because it doesn't happen. If you're gaining weight on 1200 calories (unless it's above your TDEE), you aren't eating 1200 calories
Exactly.
The only other side to that statement is that eating 1200 calories can cause one to end up binging because they're over-restricting. Due to that, it would be easier for them to lose weight on 1500 calories by avoiding constant binge cycles where they eat too little, lose weight, then gain some back with binges because they're hungry. However, those who come on the boards and say they're eating 1200 calories or less and can't lose or that they ate 1200 calories or less, didn't lose, then lost weight eating more calories are full of it. If they're being truthful, they are extremely rare cases.
Right. So you could lose more weight with a 1500 calorie goal than with a 1200 calorie goal, if 1200 leads to binges (and thus ending up averaging more than 1500 calories.)0 -
For me when I was eating 1200 calories, on top of being hungry most of the time and a little miserable, I hit a really hard plateau after about ... 6 months of losing weight. For four months nothing, no matter how much I exercised it didn't matter or how hard I was working out it didn't matter (how long or for how many days didnt matter) I was stuck. I wasn't over eating, I weighed all my food, cut most of my sugar and carbs, nothing was working. Eventually I had to increase my calories, and start over. I went up to 1500-1600 calories and began to cut slowly until my body started working with me again. Stopping at 1450 calories. I lost a nice amount of weight when 1200 calories was working for me, but it didn't work for long. I don't think you're going to gain weight on 1200 calories, I can't see that happening but you may likely do as I did and hit a very hard plateau and have to restart, which is frustrating.0
-
tracymn925 wrote: »Can someone explain this argument to me? Why do people say you will lose more weight eating 1500 calories than 1200 calories? It just makes no sense.
It's not true. You have a TDEE (total daily energy expenditure....or maintenance). If you eat under that, you lose weight. If someone "gains" at 1200 they need to look at their logging (or supposed calorie burns) something isn't right there.
1200 is MFP's lowest default minimum. Most women can eat more & still lose. Very petite ladies, and seniors need to eat that low to lose weight than. Younger, average and taller ladies can eat more.
Why would you want to eat more?
1. 1500 is closer to TDEE; transition to maintenance is more natural.
2. 1200 may lead to crankiness (and binges). You don't have to be miserable. Weight loss is a marathon, not a sprint.
3. Fast weight loss (in the scheme of things) risks lean muscle loss. Moderate paced weight loss help you lose a larger percentage of fat. What's moderate for close to goal is less per week than is moderate for quite a ways to go.0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »That's because it doesn't happen. If you're gaining weight on 1200 calories (unless it's above your TDEE), you aren't eating 1200 calories
Exactly.
The only other side to that statement is that eating 1200 calories can cause one to end up binging because they're over-restricting. Due to that, it would be easier for them to lose weight on 1500 calories by avoiding constant binge cycles where they eat too little, lose weight, then gain some back with binges because they're hungry. However, those who come on the boards and say they're eating 1200 calories or less and can't lose or that they ate 1200 calories or less, didn't lose, then lost weight eating more calories are full of it. If they're being truthful, they are extremely rare cases.
Right. So you could lose more weight with a 1500 calorie goal than with a 1200 calorie goal, if 1200 leads to binges (and thus ending up averaging more than 1500 calories.)
That is why I generally suggest not to go with 1200 if at all possible. Mathematically, yes 1200 means bigger losses than 1500. Behaviorally, it often doesn't work that way.0 -
xXxWhitneyxXx wrote: »For me when I was eating 1200 calories, on top of being hungry most of the time and a little miserable, I hit a really hard plateau after about ... 6 months of losing weight. For four months nothing, no matter how much I exercised it didn't matter or how hard I was working out it didn't matter (how long or for how many days didnt matter) I was stuck. I wasn't over eating, I weighed all my food, cut most of my sugar and carbs, nothing was working. Eventually I had to increase my calories, and start over. I went up to 1500-1600 calories and began to cut slowly until my body started working with me again. Stopping at 1450 calories. I lost a nice amount of weight when 1200 calories was working for me, but it didn't work for long. I don't think you're going to gain weight on 1200 calories, I can't see that happening but you may likely do as I did and hit a very hard plateau and have to restart, which is frustrating.
You really think that ~250 made a difference or is it more possibly you got complacent in counting because "it's what I always eat". Then later as you increased the calories again you became more mindful of your portions and we're actually eating the right #s thus losing weight. I mean 6 months is a really long time and your body needed energy from somewhere.0 -
@HutchA12 I think it really mattered. I literally measured everything to the point of annoying my husband lol NOTHING went into my mouth that wasn't weighed before hand. It was very odd, I had a different account back then and my MFP friends have given me the suggestion of maintenance then cutting again and it worked.
0 -
xXxWhitneyxXx wrote: »@HutchA12 I think it really mattered. I literally measured everything to the point of annoying my husband lol NOTHING went into my mouth that wasn't weighed before hand. It was very odd, I had a different account back then and my MFP friends have given me the suggestion of maintenance then cutting again and it worked.
What did you drink and what are your stats? There are a lot of things you could have missed but I don't beleive you stalled at a true 1200 cal. As is said above most people's bmr is above 1200. If you can produce more energy than you consume you could be the missing link to infinite clean energy.0 -
xXxWhitneyxXx wrote: »@HutchA12 I think it really mattered. I literally measured everything to the point of annoying my husband lol NOTHING went into my mouth that wasn't weighed before hand. It was very odd, I had a different account back then and my MFP friends have given me the suggestion of maintenance then cutting again and it worked.
What did you drink and what are your stats? There are a lot of things you could have missed but I don't beleive you stalled at a true 1200 cal. As is said above most people's bmr is above 1200. If you can produce more energy than you consume you could be the missing link to infinite clean energy.
I am 5'3 (and a half) at the time I weighed 155 pounds, down from 188 pounds. I drank water, maybe once a week a diet soda. No coffee, no tea, no regular soda or juice nothing. I am now 27, then was 25. And I was working out 40-60 minutes a day.0 -
The only thing I would say is that 1200 is difficult to sustain for many long term...I've seen people who have really restrictive calorie goals go on and off diet...binge..cheat meals, etc...so in the end, they're really eating 1200 sometimes but aren't consistent and have difficulty losing weight where on the other hand I've seen people with less restrictive goals have an easier time being consistent and thus ultimately losing more weight.
Losing weight efficiently and effectively requires consistency...0 -
xXxWhitneyxXx wrote: »xXxWhitneyxXx wrote: »@HutchA12 I think it really mattered. I literally measured everything to the point of annoying my husband lol NOTHING went into my mouth that wasn't weighed before hand. It was very odd, I had a different account back then and my MFP friends have given me the suggestion of maintenance then cutting again and it worked.
What did you drink and what are your stats? There are a lot of things you could have missed but I don't beleive you stalled at a true 1200 cal. As is said above most people's bmr is above 1200. If you can produce more energy than you consume you could be the missing link to infinite clean energy.
I am 5'3 (and a half) at the time I weighed 155 pounds, down from 188 pounds. I drank water, maybe once a week a diet soda. No coffee, no tea, no regular soda or juice nothing. I am now 27, then was 25. And I was working out 40-60 minutes a day.
That's insane. I'm the same height as you and I'm 113 pounds and still lose on 1600 to 2000 calories per day depending on how active I am. When I was eating 1200 calories I had to bump it up because I was losing 2.5 to 3 pounds per week. Do you have medical issues?0 -
My BMR is 1300-something. I'm eating between 1200-1400 and fluctuating downwards nicely. I don't eat breakfast, I have a light lunch and only have a beer/soft drink with my full evening meal (otherwise it's water/tea), so it's been manageable. When I had my wisdom teeth out this month, I was on liquids only. It was in the VLC zone, so I don't recommend it, but it got me used to eating less than I was used to so every cloud etc!
I tend to maintain on 1400-1800, which is annoying, but I've never been overweight in my life - only started calorie counting to lose fat - it all loves to be on my belly.
Hope at least some of this helps!0 -
xXxWhitneyxXx wrote: »xXxWhitneyxXx wrote: »@HutchA12 I think it really mattered. I literally measured everything to the point of annoying my husband lol NOTHING went into my mouth that wasn't weighed before hand. It was very odd, I had a different account back then and my MFP friends have given me the suggestion of maintenance then cutting again and it worked.
What did you drink and what are your stats? There are a lot of things you could have missed but I don't beleive you stalled at a true 1200 cal. As is said above most people's bmr is above 1200. If you can produce more energy than you consume you could be the missing link to infinite clean energy.
I am 5'3 (and a half) at the time I weighed 155 pounds, down from 188 pounds. I drank water, maybe once a week a diet soda. No coffee, no tea, no regular soda or juice nothing. I am now 27, then was 25. And I was working out 40-60 minutes a day.
That would have put you at an estimated tdee of 2591 tdee. Assuming a 1200 cal diet you get a daily deficit of -1391 so every week around -9737 so you should have been expecting ~2.7 pounds per week loss. This obviously varies based on intensity of exercise.0 -
xXxWhitneyxXx wrote: »xXxWhitneyxXx wrote: »@HutchA12 I think it really mattered. I literally measured everything to the point of annoying my husband lol NOTHING went into my mouth that wasn't weighed before hand. It was very odd, I had a different account back then and my MFP friends have given me the suggestion of maintenance then cutting again and it worked.
What did you drink and what are your stats? There are a lot of things you could have missed but I don't beleive you stalled at a true 1200 cal. As is said above most people's bmr is above 1200. If you can produce more energy than you consume you could be the missing link to infinite clean energy.
I am 5'3 (and a half) at the time I weighed 155 pounds, down from 188 pounds. I drank water, maybe once a week a diet soda. No coffee, no tea, no regular soda or juice nothing. I am now 27, then was 25. And I was working out 40-60 minutes a day.
That would have put you at an estimated tdee of 2591 tdee. Assuming a 1200 cal diet you get a daily deficit of -1391 so every week around -9737 so you should have been expecting ~2.7 pounds per week loss. This obviously varies based on intensity of exercise.
Yeah, I'm with @synacious up there. Absent a medical condition, I can't possibly think anything other than improper logging, a problem with the kitchen scale (did you change the battery, @xXxWhitneyxXx?), and/or overestimating calorie burn.
ETA: I just assumed Whitney was talking about net 1200. Is that correct?0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »That's because it doesn't happen. If you're gaining weight on 1200 calories (unless it's above your TDEE), you aren't eating 1200 calories
+1 There is no physical way for your body to lose more weight on 1500 calories than it does on 1200. I'm guessing whoever you heard this from was talking about "starvation mode," which is nonsense. The greater your deficit, the faster your rate of loss.
Lol yep. I keep seeing posts on weight loss forums where people talk about starvation mode and basically crucify anyone who is eating around 1200 calories. I see a smart group of people who back it up with "it's just not healthily sustainable" which is justified. However, there is another group of people who preach the starvation mode crap and say that on lower calorie diets your body will "hold on" to any food it can get and cause you to gain weight versus a 1500 calorie diet.
0 -
Yeeeeeeah no. My 2.5 year old son is supposed to gain weight on 1200 calories OR MORE a day. Now he's a growing boy, but in what strange universe does anyone really believe a 30lb kid can maintain at 1200 but a 150lb adult gains? That's absurd. If someone is gaining or maintaining on 1200 it's due to shocking logging inaccuracy coupled with an extremely sedentary lifestyle and a metabolism affecting disorder the likes of untreated Hypothyroidism (and to be fair, there are members here who have actual medical disorders to which these could apply, but that's a small small minority, not everyone you hear saying this). It just isn't possible any other way.
Even sedentary short (5ftish) females manage to lose just fine on 1400/1500 if their logging is accurate and they get in some form of physical activity (low-level even as walking).0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »xXxWhitneyxXx wrote: »xXxWhitneyxXx wrote: »@HutchA12 I think it really mattered. I literally measured everything to the point of annoying my husband lol NOTHING went into my mouth that wasn't weighed before hand. It was very odd, I had a different account back then and my MFP friends have given me the suggestion of maintenance then cutting again and it worked.
What did you drink and what are your stats? There are a lot of things you could have missed but I don't beleive you stalled at a true 1200 cal. As is said above most people's bmr is above 1200. If you can produce more energy than you consume you could be the missing link to infinite clean energy.
I am 5'3 (and a half) at the time I weighed 155 pounds, down from 188 pounds. I drank water, maybe once a week a diet soda. No coffee, no tea, no regular soda or juice nothing. I am now 27, then was 25. And I was working out 40-60 minutes a day.
That would have put you at an estimated tdee of 2591 tdee. Assuming a 1200 cal diet you get a daily deficit of -1391 so every week around -9737 so you should have been expecting ~2.7 pounds per week loss. This obviously varies based on intensity of exercise.
Yeah, I'm with @synacious up there. Absent a medical condition, I can't possibly think anything other than improper logging, a problem with the kitchen scale (did you change the battery, @xXxWhitneyxXx?), and/or overestimating calorie burn.
ETA: I just assumed Whitney was talking about net 1200. Is that correct?
Yes I was and yes I changed the battery haha also, I didnt calculate my burn at all actually. I would give myself an extra 100 calories on days when I ran over a certain time or x amount of miles.0 -
xXxWhitneyxXx wrote: »tincanonastring wrote: »xXxWhitneyxXx wrote: »xXxWhitneyxXx wrote: »@HutchA12 I think it really mattered. I literally measured everything to the point of annoying my husband lol NOTHING went into my mouth that wasn't weighed before hand. It was very odd, I had a different account back then and my MFP friends have given me the suggestion of maintenance then cutting again and it worked.
What did you drink and what are your stats? There are a lot of things you could have missed but I don't beleive you stalled at a true 1200 cal. As is said above most people's bmr is above 1200. If you can produce more energy than you consume you could be the missing link to infinite clean energy.
I am 5'3 (and a half) at the time I weighed 155 pounds, down from 188 pounds. I drank water, maybe once a week a diet soda. No coffee, no tea, no regular soda or juice nothing. I am now 27, then was 25. And I was working out 40-60 minutes a day.
That would have put you at an estimated tdee of 2591 tdee. Assuming a 1200 cal diet you get a daily deficit of -1391 so every week around -9737 so you should have been expecting ~2.7 pounds per week loss. This obviously varies based on intensity of exercise.
Yeah, I'm with @synacious up there. Absent a medical condition, I can't possibly think anything other than improper logging, a problem with the kitchen scale (did you change the battery, @xXxWhitneyxXx?), and/or overestimating calorie burn.
ETA: I just assumed Whitney was talking about net 1200. Is that correct?
Yes I was and yes I changed the battery haha also, I didnt calculate my burn at all actually. I would give myself an extra 100 calories on days when I ran over a certain time or x amount of miles.
So you weren't properly observing your calories out... but you were meticulously looking at your calories in? So in essence you had no idea what you were netting for calories everyday. Because this is implying 1200-1000 calories or less a day which only increases the deficit. You were working out probably getting hungry and over eating if what you say is true.
You didn't live 6 months at these numbers without losing significant weight.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions