Does anyone use the 1200 cal guideline?
Replies
-
seekingdaintiness wrote: »The imaginary mfp diet strikes again!
There is no magic eating back your calories science to weight loss. You don't do it, folks. You exercise to speed your weight loss. It doesn't work in some special different way because you are using this particular diet tracker. You misunderstand this particular software and use it as an excuse to eat more then wonder why you can't lose weight. It would be funny except for how you all misinform others on a daily basis.
Actually, you are mistaken...this is exactly how MFP is designed...it is how you account for exercise activity as it is not included in your activity level. Learning how to fuel your fitness is important...it's actually what lean, healthy, and fit people do.
You don't exercise to speed your weight loss...you exercise for fitness and general health and wellness.
Maybe you should read the stickies and figure out how this tool is actually designed to work...6 -
seekingdaintiness wrote: »The imaginary mfp diet strikes again!
There is no magic eating back your calories science to weight loss. You don't do it, folks. You exercise to speed your weight loss. It doesn't work in some special different way because you are using this particular diet tracker. You misunderstand this particular software and use it as an excuse to eat more then wonder why you can't lose weight. It would be funny except for how you all misinform others on a daily basis.
Actually, you are misunderstanding. This is exactly how MFP is supposed to work.
You pick a weekly goal - say I want to lose 1 lb per week. MFP gives you a calorie goal so that without exercise, you lose 1 lb per week.
Then you exercise. If you don't eat back at least some of those calories, you will lose faster than you wanted to, possibly undereating, and not fueling your exercise.
So yes, if you are using the MFP calorie goal, you are supposed to eat back exercise calories.
If you use TDEE or some other method that factors your exercise into your goal, then you don't eat those calories back.
I've been here going on four years and will forever be baffled at how something so simple is just completely missed by so many...7 -
Sydneymchamberlain wrote: »My question is, does anyone actually eat the recommended 1200 calories? I burn about 500 a day between biking and exercising.
Can you do it? Sure. Should you do it? Depends on your height, weight, gender, age, and goal.
Enter your stats into MFP and set it to losing a half pound a week. Then, eat back 50-100% of any exercise calories you get. What that number is, is unique to you.
I do eat 1200 calories a day, because I'm short and sedentary. My body doesn't require the same number of calories that another woman who is 5'6" would require. I do eat back some but not all of my exercise calories, so on days I don't exercise, I keep it to 1200. On days I do exercise, I might be eating 1500. And I'm still losing.1 -
I follow the IIFYM plan and do NOT eat back calories burned through exercise.1
-
I get about 1,200 calories on days that I'm not really hungry or very very busy. The most I consume is 1,400 and I measure very accurately.1
-
seekingdaintiness wrote: »The imaginary mfp diet strikes again!
There is no magic eating back your calories science to weight loss. You don't do it, folks. You exercise to speed your weight loss. It doesn't work in some special different way because you are using this particular diet tracker. You misunderstand this particular software and use it as an excuse to eat more then wonder why you can't lose weight. It would be funny except for how you all misinform others on a daily basis.
This particular software uses the NEAT system and as such is designed for exercise calories to be eaten back. See http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/818082/exercise-calories-again-wtf/p1
Just who are you talking about who is "misinforming" people how MFP is designed to work AND wondering why they can't lose weight?1 -
Will_Run_for_Food wrote: »I follow the IIFYM plan and do NOT eat back calories burned through exercise.
That's becaue the IIFYM calculator already accounts for exercise, MFP does not by default.3 -
I don't use the 1200 Cal guideline. Having said that, our Cal allowances will fluctuate based on our personal stats and goals. My calorie allowance in line with my current weight goal is 1610 calories. The changes you make to your diet must be sustainable if you want to keep the weight off. Do you think that you can make 1200 calories your permanent norm intake over time?0
-
godlikepoetyes wrote: »WHY do you guys eat only 1,200 calories? If MFP gives you so few, then by all means go with it. But most women, MOST, do not need to eat so few calories to lose weight. I hear about this "1,200" calories all the time. I think it's because many women believe, or fear, they just won't lose unless they eat the absolute minimum. This is simply not the case for most women. I was on another post and a woman, who is 5'8"!! was eating only 1,200! This is absurd. I suggest that everyone do some research into TDEE and to consider the World Heath Organization's definition of food malnutrition/food insecurity--anyone who consumes fewer than 1,800 calories a day is "chronically under-nourished and hungry." Obviously this is an average across the weights of every age, sex, and height of normal weight persons, but doesn't that number put things into perspective? The TDEE for healthy men and women is between 2,350 and 3,000 and those numbers are likely too low.
I think a lot of it has to do with the weekly weight loss goal. Someone sets up a new account and when they set up their goals they see that 2 pounds a week is an option and they go with it. I did the same thing but once I seen the recommendations from other members in the forum posts I changed it to 1 pound a week based on how much I have to lose.2 -
I am a fairly short woman with a sedentary job and not much exercise (slowly building up after an injury last year - can't believe how long rehab has taken/is taking, but it is what it is).
My stats also give me 1200 per day, which I find fine as long as I eat sensibly.
On days I exercise, I do eat back at least some of my exercise calories - if I feel like I am hungry I eat them all, if not, I eat maybe half.
I enter my exercise using the MFP database, so don't use any other calculators.
1 -
OK, maybe a little more than you asked for, OP, but...
I started dieting 7 weeks ago, and I had a goal of 1,200 kcal/day thing for two weeks, then moved my goal up to 1,300 kcal/day for another two weeks, and then to 1,400 kcal/day for a month—so I have another week there, and then I'll move up to 1,600/day for either four weeks or eight, depending on my weight at that point. I was at 180 lbs on Day 1; two weeks later when I moved up to a 1,300/day target, I'd already lost 10 lbs (probably mostly water weight) and was at 170; two weeks later, when I moved my target to 1,400/day, I'd lost 5 lbs and was at 165; two weeks later, still at a 1,400/day goal, I was 160.
I found the 1,200/day goal difficult because I was constantly hungry—but I never went over by much, and in fact I was often under, just because I was new to the whole idea and wasn't totally sure what I was doing. My two weeks at a 1,300/day goal was difficult in a different way; there was a lot of fluctuation because I'd started exercising and was trying (and not often succeeding) to figure out how to balance my total caloric and net caloric intakes. At 1,400/day, I gave up on that kind of regular exercise because everything was so erratic, although I do get out and walk some days, and I try to eat back what I burn off.
In the chart, dark blue is net calories, and light blue is total (if over net). I like a 1,400/day goal, but I'm not planning on eating low-cal for long and can't wait to get up to maintenance (which should be about 1,800–2,000, depending on which calculations I use) by September at the latest, but hopefully before. I don't think eating too low should be done for any great amount of time, and 1,200—especially at 133 lbs with only 15 to go—seems far too low to me. I'm eating at 1,400 now and losing about 2.5 lbs/week . . . but it all depends, I think, on your metabolism, how quickly and easily you lose weight.
SOOO . . . to finally get to the point: I think counting calories will help, but do you need to go down to 1,200? If you haven't been counting calories up to now, it's hard to say, but I'd suggest that for a few days, you continue eating as normal and log everything to find out your current daily average. If you can take off 100 or 200 kcal/day from that number without dropping to 1,200, then I suggest just trying that for a while. You should still lose weight that way—and it may not be as rapidly as it has been the past few months, but that's OK. Half a pound or a quarter of a pound a week is still weight loss.
Sorry for rambling . . . and GOOD LUCK!0 -
seekingdaintiness wrote: »The imaginary mfp diet strikes again!
There is no magic eating back your calories science to weight loss. You don't do it, folks. You exercise to speed your weight loss. It doesn't work in some special different way because you are using this particular diet tracker. You misunderstand this particular software and use it as an excuse to eat more then wonder why you can't lose weight. It would be funny except for how you all misinform others on a daily basis.
Ironic post is ironic. This is exactly how MFP is designed to work, it calculates a deficit for you using NEAT, which accounts for all your daily activity except exercise, so that if you do exercise you are meant to eat it back.
OP I am about the same stats as you. I'm 5'2 and started at 150 lbs with a goal of losing 25. I was initially set at sedentary and lose 1 lb/week, and the system gave my 1200. I wasn't exercising much but I did eat back my cals (because I read the forum stickies and understood that you should) and was still always over calories, but still losing. I came to these boards and started lurking in the threads and learned from wise veterans here that 1200 is often unnecessary, even for petite women. I changed my goal manually first to 1400, then 1500, working on exercising more and still eating back cals. I lost about 18 lbs and then got a FitBit, had about 12 lbs to go so I changed my goal to 0.5 lb/week and was averaging 10k steps a day so I changed my activity level to lightly active also because of good advice on the forums. I ate back exercise adjustments, reached my goal weight about a year from when I initially started (after a couple of months of slacking during summer and holidays).
I now am maintaining at 120, my TDEE is 2200 because I'm much more active now (averaging 15k steps a day). I lost my weight eating between 1600-1900 calories.
So no, 1200 is not necessarily recommended nor is it necessary in order to lose, even for petite women.5 -
godlikepoetyes wrote: »WHY do you guys eat only 1,200 calories? If MFP gives you so few, then by all means go with it. But most women, MOST, do not need to eat so few calories to lose weight. I hear about this "1,200" calories all the time. I think it's because many women believe, or fear, they just won't lose unless they eat the absolute minimum. This is simply not the case for most women. I was on another post and a woman, who is 5'8"!! was eating only 1,200! This is absurd. I suggest that everyone do some research into TDEE and to consider the World Heath Organization's definition of food malnutrition/food insecurity--anyone who consumes fewer than 1,800 calories a day is "chronically under-nourished and hungry." Obviously this is an average across the weights of every age, sex, and height of normal weight persons, but doesn't that number put things into perspective? The TDEE for healthy men and women is between 2,350 and 3,000 and those numbers are likely too low.
Because that is what my TDEE and BMR calculated for me to lose 2lbs a week at my weight and activity level.
People act as if 1200 is sooooooooooo little food but I eat all day long. If you accurately measure your food in grams and ensure you're eating a lot of protein and fat 1200 is plenty.
2 -
I now am maintaining at 120, my TDEE is 2200 because I'm much more active now (averaging 15k steps a day). I lost my weight eating between 1600-1900 calories.
Good for you! I wish everyone could read this and just think logically about it.2 -
godlikepoetyes wrote: »I now am maintaining at 120, my TDEE is 2200 because I'm much more active now (averaging 15k steps a day). I lost my weight eating between 1600-1900 calories.
Good for you! I wish everyone could read this and just think logically about it.
Thanks, me too. Certainly there are some for whom it is appropriate, but for many it is not. It makes me sad when people like the OP seem to think this is what is required, referring to it as "the recommended amount". Many people try 1200 and fail, and give up because they think it's too hard. Others stick with it, and maybe they don't find it too restrictive, but if you can eat more and still lose, why would you not want that? As a wise rabbit here once said, "the winner is the one who eats the most food and still reaches their goal".2 -
I am all about eating as much as I possibly can.3
-
I've been on 1200 calories since January and lost 28lbs doing it (a pound a week). I keep it strictly that low as I don't weigh my food, and I don't count things like coffee, so I probably take in more calories than I record, but it works for me.1
-
I just had lunch with a friend. She's over 5'6", weighs 215, and has herself at 1,200 calories! She keeps starting and stopping and starting MFP again. I don't get it.0
-
I use the 1200 calorie goal, but I use it as a bit of a 'yellow light' so when I make that mark I know I have eaten 'enough'. I had an ED many years ago and trying to lose weight is stressful because I don't want to cause harm to my body but I do want to drop some lbs. I try to stay between 1200 and 1500, which allows me to be a little more easy on myself. To me 1200 is not a limit but a minimum.0
-
I set mine at 1200. For me it serves more for me to keep motivated to do things like, take a short walk during lunch, etc., as well as makes me more mindful of portion control, extra snacking, packing nutrition in what I do eat vs empty calories, etc. Physical activity usually adds to the bank so it's often 'eaten back' and more than 1200 is consumed in a day. I use it more of a "motivation/awareness check" than a goal, per se. Even if I "break even" on the calories at the end of the day, I often underestimate the physical activity for a non-visible buffer.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393K Introduce Yourself
- 43.7K Getting Started
- 260.1K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.8K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 415 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.9K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.6K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.5K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions