1350 calories a day...how do you do it?
Replies
-
To specify, then, I am 5'4, 186 lbs (down from 217 in May) and aiming for 125-130 lbs, and I'm planing to be doing this for about a year. 1350 is what MFP gave me when I started, for a 1.5 lb per week loss, and that's held more or less true (though I'm a "woosh-er"--I might go a week or two with no significant loss, and then lose a whole lot in one week). Sometimes when I change my weight it tries to give me even fewer calories, but I plan to stick to 1350 unless I plateau for several weeks.0
-
For a short, small-framed woman who cannot exercise much due to disability like me, 1200-1400 calories a day was a necessity. I'm at maintenance now, but if I go above 1500 calories, I gain weight. If you are in good health, you can exercise the extra 300 calories per day somewhat easily. But if you have a metabolic condition or some other health problem, or are older (I'm in my 50's), you may have to be pretty strict about keeping the calories low.
Number one thing I always do is weigh my food. Takes a lot of guesswork out of the equation. I almost never eat out - too expensive and too few choices that are truly low calorie. As for eating at home, protein sources that are lower in fat will save some calories. Eliminating "extras" like sauces, gravies, butter, condiments, etc. make more difference than you might think. Use stevia, a natural no-calorie sweetener, instead of sugar. Keep meals simple and balanced - protein, veggies and/or small portions of fruit, whole grains (I do gluten free). You don't have to cook at every meal - you can do nonfat Greek yogurt with some berries and a bit of granola; or hummus and nonfat feta on crackers with a few walnuts and baby carrots for "dessert"; string cheese with root vegetable chips and an apple; or some other ready-to-eat combo. Be creative.0 -
I stay under 1500 calories, usually around 1400. If I exercise, I allow myself more leeway. But even when I don't exercise, I'm usually fine. Breakfast is usually a strange combo, but one that works for me...some sort of frozen vegetable with sauce and cheese on top. (Just 1/4 cup of each. Sauce and cheese on anything makes it taste good in my book!) Lunch might be carrots and a small amount of crackers dipped in hummus, or a big salad with chicken and a few tablespoons of dressing, or rice cakes and cheese/peanut butter. Dinner is whatever my family is having -- anything from Korean bolgogi to enchilladas to pita pizza. I try to make sure there are plenty of veggies to fill up on, but I'll eat a good serving or two of the "main" food. (Last night, though, my family was having pasta, and I prelogged it and decided it wasn't worth the calories. So I made myself three fried eggs, some sauteed zuchinni, and ate an apple.)
For snacks I might have a fruit, a handful of nuts, or something like that.
What I found to be most helpful (and I'm only a few weeks in) is to prelog what I plan to eat ahead of time, so that I know how much I can have. That way I go into the meal thinking "I can eat two pieces of the homemade pizza and still have calories left for half a bag of baby carrots and a whole sweet potato-worth of sweet potato fries." Then I eat slowly, and very often am full without a problem.
I do use up most of my calories at dinnertime, because if I'm not full at night I get the munchies. During the day I'm working, running around after my family of four kids, and just staying busy, so I don't have as much time to focus on food anyway.0 -
Aaron_K123 wrote: »I'm just curious. What do people think when they think they are sedentary?
To me sedentary means basically bed-ridden. You are on the couch or in a chair 16 hours and you are in bed 8.
Lightly active is you have a desk job but you do occasionally get out of your chair and walk to go get something.
Moderatly active is you have a desk job, get out of your chair occassionaly but also intentionally go for long walks in the mornings and evenings.
Active is the above plus doing some intensive cardio or having a more active job.
I think people mark sedentary WAY to often. Sedentary should be an unusal set of circumstances, not the norm. Lightly active is probably what most people are. If you are in an office job where you walk down the hall to talk to Bob, then you walk to the printer, then walk to your office do some work then get up and walk to the lunch room then walk down the stairs to get a coffee you aren't sedentary.
I don't think your desk job is the same as everyone's. I have my activity setting as sedentary, and most days I get a lot of calories added back because I'm busy with lab work or teaching and get around 8000 steps without a deliberate walk. But sedentary definitely does not equal bedridden, at least according to MFP and Fitbit.
One day last week, I barely left my desk at work because I was grading, writing, and studying. I only got 2700 steps that day. I had a negative calorie adjustment because I didn't walk enough to even meet my sedentary baseline. On Sunday's, which are my do-nothing rest day, I get maybe 1500 steps and usually have a -200kcal adjustment.1 -
spinderellaj wrote: »Hi everyone!
I'm trying to stick to a goal of 1350 calories a day...and I'm finding it impossible! I'm usually coming in around 1600, which is fine but I don't lose any weight with that.
Just curious, to the people who actually do this - how the heck do you do it? Are you hungry? How much preparation do you take for your meals? And what the heck do you eat?
My diary is open. And honest.
Thanks!
My limit was 1350 cal ... and I usually ate around 1600. Thank goodness for lots of exercise!1 -
I have a desk job and some days I get 3500-4K steps, some days I get 12K because I walk on breaks and lunch and park about 15 minutes away. So it can vary pretty wildly depending on the person and the effort they're willing to expend.2
-
Aaron_K123 wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »Aaron_K123 wrote: »So what are people saying?
That despite being uncomfortable eating 1350 calories a day that it is inappropriate of me to suggest that the OP might be okay to eat more than that? Is that really such a bad thing to say? Should I instead be recommending she drink lots of coffee to supress her appetite?
I'm just repeating myself at this point to the myriad of responses I am getting which means I am spamming the thread which I imagine the OP isn't appreciating. I'm going to stop because of that but I stand by what I said. I think for the purpose of health if you are a younger, able bodied person that is looking to lose a little bit of weight and get healthier and is struggling with low calorie that a good way to do that is to increase your activity level (work on your cardiovascular health) and eat more to feel more satisfied. I also suggested that that advice might very well apply to a lot of the "1200-1350" calorie dieters out there. If people really want to go at me over this I can create another thread and can debate there but I think its wrong of me to spam in here any longer replying to people.
The problem was you jumped on it without further information from the OP with her stats and goals and current activity and whether she is netting 1350. Instead you started making sweeping statements that everyone should eat more. That's as unhelpful as the generic everyone needs to eat 1200 to lose diet industry mantra.
I find it really puzzling you got your knickers in such a twist before we had any further details and now we have this *kitten* of a thread.
Yes, that is fair...I apologize. The way you put it makes sense and I can admit fault there. Perhaps I was bringing in baggage from other 1200 calorie dieters I've interacted with on the forums. Some people are legit hurting themselves and I struggle just standing by with that, but you are right I shouldn't leap to that conclusion or get immediatly defensive if people argue against the idea of eating more. I do believe there are a lot of people who use the MFP calculator to justify dangerously low caloric diets and I get frustrated by that.Aaron_K123 wrote: »So what are people saying?
That despite being uncomfortable eating 1350 calories a day that it is inappropriate of me to suggest that the OP might be okay to eat more than that? Is that really such a bad thing to say? Should I instead be recommending she drink lots of coffee to supress her appetite?
I'm just repeating myself at this point to the myriad of responses I am getting which means I am spamming the thread which I imagine the OP isn't appreciating. I'm going to stop because of that but I stand by what I said. I think for the purpose of health if you are a younger, able bodied person that is looking to lose a little bit of weight and get healthier and is struggling with low calorie that a good way to do that is to increase your activity level (work on your cardiovascular health) and eat more to feel more satisfied. I also suggested that that advice might very well apply to a lot of the "1200-1350" calorie dieters out there. If people really want to go at me over this I can create another thread and can debate there but I think its wrong of me to spam in here any longer replying to people.
I just wanted to make some points in regards to this.
In my opinion, you passed judgement on the majority. You have passed your way of thinking as common law. You have obsessively intervened with this thread and most of the things are repeated over and over again in other threads. I am unclear what your motivation is really, but if there is a couple of things to add:
First bolded sentence: what the heck does this mean?
Second bolded sentence: in my opinion this where you passed judgement on every single human being (women) that falls out of this category.
I am a firm believer in " Those that can eat more and loose weight, wins" CHA CHING!
If we call could eat 2000 calories a day, loose weight or maintain that weight we would.
In my opinion, there is complete lacking of all the facts you need to make such assumptions this is quite is clear. One size does not fit all, and your bias based opinions are unarguable for the masses.
I hope in future threads you consider the audience you are speaking to out loud through your words.8 -
Aaron_K123 wrote: »So what are people saying?
That despite being uncomfortable eating 1350 calories a day that it is inappropriate of me to suggest that the OP might be okay to eat more than that? Is that really such a bad thing to say? Should I instead be recommending she drink lots of coffee to supress her appetite?
I'm just repeating myself at this point to the myriad of responses I am getting which means I am spamming the thread which I imagine the OP isn't appreciating. I'm going to stop because of that but I stand by what I said. I think for the purpose of health if you are a younger, able bodied person that is looking to lose a little bit of weight and get healthier and is struggling with low calorie that a good way to do that is to increase your activity level (work on your cardiovascular health) and eat more to feel more satisfied. I also suggested that that advice might very well apply to a lot of the "1200-1350" calorie dieters out there. If people really want to go at me over this I can create another thread and can debate there but I think its wrong of me to spam in here any longer replying to people.
I'm with you on this @Aaron_K123. I'm not particularly young or able-bodied - I'm almost 50 and have bad knees and am prone to shin splints. I have a desk job. Yet I was able to raise my activity level to a point where I get sufficient calories and am only hungry right before meals.2 -
Aaron_K123 wrote: »I'm just curious. What do people think when they think they are sedentary?
To me sedentary means basically bed-ridden. You are on the couch or in a chair 16 hours and you are in bed 8.
Lightly active is you have a desk job but you do occasionally get out of your chair and walk to go get something.
Moderatly active is you have a desk job, get out of your chair occassionaly but also intentionally go for long walks in the mornings and evenings.
Active is the above plus doing some intensive cardio or having a more active job.
I think people mark sedentary WAY to often. Sedentary should be an unusal set of circumstances, not the norm. Lightly active is probably what most people are. If you are in an office job where you walk down the hall to talk to Bob, then you walk to the printer, then walk to your office do some work then get up and walk to the lunch room then walk down the stairs to get a coffee you aren't sedentary.
I don't think your desk job is the same as everyone's. I have my activity setting as sedentary, and most days I get a lot of calories added back because I'm busy with lab work or teaching and get around 8000 steps without a deliberate walk. But sedentary definitely does not equal bedridden, at least according to MFP and Fitbit.
One day last week, I barely left my desk at work because I was grading, writing, and studying. I only got 2700 steps that day. I had a negative calorie adjustment because I didn't walk enough to even meet my sedentary baseline. On Sunday's, which are my do-nothing rest day, I get maybe 1500 steps and usually have a -200kcal adjustment.
I used to keep mine on sedentary even though I wasn't...I just logged ALL my activity. People would question why I logged an hour of cleaning or taking the baby for a walk but it was just a more accurate way to manage CICO in my humble opinion.1 -
I skip breakfast or eat something very light for breakfast (like one egg). Some people swear you need breakfast, but I don't need it. You could try limiting your breakfast and lunch and having a larger dinner.0
-
I was trying to avoid this thread but people keep posting @ me.
@AnnTP77 I was trying to help. I think my first post here was fine but in responding to others I got overly defensive and sounded patronizing and antagonistic. I shouldn't have responded to every response and should have let it go.
@eveandqsmom makes a good point about "eat" versus "net" and I think I got myself into trouble assuming OP and others meant eat.
@AnnTP77 with net/eat in mind I did read OP wasn't losing at 1600 calories but was struggling to eat 1350. I was attempting to suggest that there are two ways to approach a deficit and that she might be able to eat more while still netting 1350 by increasing her activity level.
I think netting 1350 is fine for a smaller woman and I understand there are some who cannot exercise so that is what they aim to eat as well. But if you can exercise and struggle to eat 1350 you may feel much more comfortable eating more and netting the same by increasing activity.
@RoxieDawn I see how I came across as judgmental and patronizing which is why I apologized and backed out. If you want to know why I respond the way I do it is because I feel the culture has placed undue emphasis on scale weight with little regard to actual health and that dropping pounds is valued over increasing fitness given increasing fitness sometimes means weight gain. I also feel the culture considers exercise a form of vanity for the selfish who take time away from work and family in order to improve their own fitness. I believe the culture also promotes quicker is better thinking where one should go as fast as they can to accomplish a goal. I believe taken all together that this culture pushes for very low calorie diets with faster than necessary weightloss and minimal to no exercise to save time. I believe this approach can lead to muscle loss and an actual decrease in one's fitness and longterm health, and uncomfortable weight loss experience where you are often hungry followed by extreme difficulty with maintenance. Lastly I believe at least with the scale weight that many of these cultural drivers have a gender bias where the culture pressures women much more than men on things such as scale weight.
I found that depressing but then I met people on this site who approached dieting by eating the same or even more and greatly increasing their activity level and I found that inspiring. Because of that I tend to post on low cal posts where the OP is struggling and suggest that a deficit can be reached through increased activity.
My tone is wrong and I get over defensive so I need to work on that. What I'm trying to do is fight a culture that I view as toxic to people's actual health.9 -
Christine_72 wrote: »Aaron_K123 wrote: »SuzySunshine99 wrote: »Aaron_K123 wrote: »Correct me if I am wrong but BMR is a function of lean mass which is basically a function of your muscle mass. Men do have an advantage in this (but a small advantage not a huge advantage) and size does add to this of course.
My lean mass is about 136 pounds and I weigh 173. I'm 6' tall so my BMR is around 1700. So if you are a 5'6'' woman you probably have a lean mass of around 100 (although it varies). So in theory your BMR is probably around 1400.
So the difference between a man and a woman on average is about 300 calories from BMR. Now if I go for a mile run I probably burn 20% more than that example woman but again, not a ton more...just some more.
It isn't that hard for an average sized woman to lose weight at 1900 calories a day (i lose weight at 2400 a day). So again it baffles me how many are on this site (from the forums) eating 1200 or 1300 a day.
Here is a TDEE calculator, can try it yourself.
http://scoobysworkshop.com/calorie-calculator/
With my stats my TDEE from this calculator is 2800 which is pretty spot on because I lose about a pound a week eating 2300 calories a day. A 5'6'' woman at 155 pounds doing moderate exercise would lose 1 pound a week at 1900 calories a day.
Playing with this, thinking about a slightly overweight woman who wants to lose at a quick 1 pound per week I tried to figure out what size of woman that would be where 1350 would be the target. In otherwords were 1350 would be 500 calories a day under their maintenance.
Assumed 3-5 hours a week of light to moderate activity (because you can go for a walk now and again), 36 years old. Looked for what height and weight that person would have to be for 1350 calories to be their diet.
So 1350 calories for 1 pound a week loss (aggressive diet) is the diet of a 4'4'' tall 110 pound woman.
So yeah, do you really need to be eating 1350 calories a day?
Well, just as an example, and using the Scooby calculator...I am a 40 year old, 5'4", 127 lb female. I have a desk job that keeps me sedentary 6 days a week for up to 14 hours a day. My TDEE is 1576, which is where I stay to maintain, so 1200-1300 to lose was where I needed to be.
My husband is a 6'0", 190 lb male. He has a very physical, active job 6 days a week. His TDEE is 2764. So, it really depends on the person and the lifestyle. You can't paint everyone with such a broad stroke.
Also keep in mind just opting to go for a 30 minute walk everyday would qualify you as being lightly active...most people I feel can fit that into their day. Rather than post on MFP at a computer for example they could post from their phone while walking. That 30min a day of walking would add a good 100 calories to your daily amount, can add 200 of you just make that 30 min in the morning and 30 min after work.
I get people are busy, but if health is the goal then health should recieve at least some priority. 1350 calories a day is not necessary except in the most extreme of cases.
Absolutely! I've been walking at a good clip while reading this thread and 10 more before it. I could have chosen to sit on my comfy couch while reading the forums, but why not kill 2 birds with one stone and exercise and read at the same time.
I'm fortunate enough that i have time and health on my side, so i can exercise as much as i want/need. Exercise is the key to not having to eat a minimal amount of calories.
OP i don't know how people eat such little calories either. I've tried unsuccessfully many times to eat under 1450 calories a day, but i failed every time.
"I'm fortunate enough that i have time and health on my side"- Please don't make us jealous by saying that you don't work. I'm working very hard to get there too. Can't wait to retire. Hope to be able to do so by 50 at the latest. That's a few more years. 1 -
I have no advice because I couldn't do it. I'm a woman just under 5'8" and I eat 1800-2000 most days and lose. I set my goal to only 1/2lb per week and am pretty active I guess. I'm losing as planned and don't feel deprived. I had to adjust my goal to make my changes sustainable.
If I were trying to lose faster or not willing to work out I would have to eat less and be starving. I know myself well enough to know I'd give up living like that.0 -
Aaron_K123 wrote: »Correct me if I am wrong but BMR is a function of lean mass which is basically a function of your muscle mass. Men do have an advantage in this (but a small advantage not a huge advantage) and size does add to this of course.
My lean mass is about 136 pounds and I weigh 173. I'm 6' tall so my BMR is around 1700. So if you are a 5'6'' woman you probably have a lean mass of around 100 (although it varies). So in theory your BMR is probably around 1400.
So the difference between a man and a woman on average is about 300 calories from BMR. Now if I go for a mile run I probably burn 20% more than that example woman but again, not a ton more...just some more.
It isn't that hard for an average sized woman to lose weight at 1900 calories a day (i lose weight at 2400 a day). So again it baffles me how many are on this site (from the forums) eating 1200 or 1300 a day.
Here is a TDEE calculator, can try it yourself.
http://scoobysworkshop.com/calorie-calculator/
With my stats my TDEE from this calculator is 2800 which is pretty spot on because I lose about a pound a week eating 2300 calories a day. A 5'6'' woman at 155 pounds doing moderate exercise would lose 1 pound a week at 1900 calories a day.
Playing with this, thinking about a slightly overweight woman who wants to lose at a quick 1 pound per week I tried to figure out what size of woman that would be where 1350 would be the target. In otherwords were 1350 would be 500 calories a day under their maintenance.
Assumed 3-5 hours a week of light to moderate activity (because you can go for a walk now and again), 36 years old. Looked for what height and weight that person would have to be for 1350 calories to be their diet.
So 1350 calories for 1 pound a week loss (aggressive diet) is the diet of a 4'4'' tall 110 pound woman.
So yeah, do you really need to be eating 1350 calories a day?
What you are saying makes sense, 100%. BUT, I've lost and gained a ton of weight over the years, and I am an experienced logger. I have NEVER lost a single lb eating over 1600 calories a day, and rarely even then. And if I want to lose a lb-ish per week, I have to eat under that, and that is with a moderate activity level. I am 5'6". I'd love nothing more than to lose on 1900 calories a day, believe you me.3 -
I found this inspiring:
https://www.nerdfitness.com/blog/2011/07/21/meet-staci-your-new-powerlifting-super-hero/
Of course not everyone has the time or will to do that, I do understand that it is an extreme example, but just the idea that looking better and feeling better doesn't have to be weight loss (for those who are not obese or very overweight) seems to be a powerful idea worth mentioning as a counterpoint to low-calorie dieting. If that is not for you thats okay and I apologize for coming across as so insistant.2 -
Aaron_K123 wrote: »I was trying to avoid this thread but people keep posting @ me.
@AnnTP77 I was trying to help. I think my first post here was fine but in responding to others I got overly defensive and sounded patronizing and antagonistic. I shouldn't have responded to every response and should have let it go.
@eveandqsmom makes a good point about "eat" versus "net" and I think I got myself into trouble assuming OP and others meant eat.
@AnnTP77 with net/eat in mind I did read OP wasn't losing at 1600 calories but was struggling to eat 1350. I was attempting to suggest that there are two ways to approach a deficit and that she might be able to eat more while still netting 1350 by increasing her activity level.
I think netting 1350 is fine for a smaller woman and I understand there are some who cannot exercise so that is what they aim to eat as well. But if you can exercise and struggle to eat 1350 you may feel much more comfortable eating more and netting the same by increasing activity.
@RoxieDawn I see how I came across as judgmental and patronizing which is why I apologized and backed out. If you want to know why I respond the way I do it is because I feel the culture has placed undue emphasis on scale weight with little regard to actual health and that dropping pounds is valued over increasing fitness given increasing fitness sometimes means weight gain. I also feel the culture considers exercise a form of vanity for the selfish who take time away from work and family in order to improve their own fitness. I believe the culture also promotes quicker is better thinking where one should go as fast as they can to accomplish a goal. I believe taken all together that this culture pushes for very low calorie diets with faster than necessary weightloss and minimal to no exercise to save time. I believe this approach can lead to muscle loss and an actual decrease in one's fitness and longterm health, and uncomfortable weight loss experience where you are often hungry followed by extreme difficulty with maintenance. Lastly I believe at least with the scale weight that many of these cultural drivers have a gender bias where the culture pressures women much more than men on things such as scale weight.
I found that depressing but then I met people on this site who approached dieting by eating the same or even more and greatly increasing their activity level and I found that inspiring. Because of that I tend to post on low cal posts where the OP is struggling and suggest that a deficit can be reached through increased activity.
My tone is wrong and I get over defensive so I need to work on that. What I'm trying to do is fight a culture that I view as toxic to people's actual health.
I think we all are trying to fight this everyday otherwise why would be spending our free time doing this every day?
I am in complete agreement regarding pushing faster, quicker, better (not really such a thing) weight loss and I hate the idea of muscle loss more than you. Can't save the world, but I promise if you write it just once, the message will be reached and to the right person, and that person will take or leave it..
Also taking each thread, on a case by case basis and staying within the confines of the facts given so that you can help the OP by address their concerns first and foremost should be priority. If you really want to reach some masses out there with your message, start new threads everyday!!
0 -
austinsneeze wrote: »I skip breakfast or eat something very light for breakfast (like one egg). Some people swear you need breakfast, but I don't need it. You could try limiting your breakfast and lunch and having a larger dinner.
I do the same, rarely eat breakfast. I prefer to have my "breakfast' as a snack at 10pm0 -
My diary is open always you can add me. Im on a 1450 calories though but use to be 1200. I do exercise so usually i hit around 1550 because the exercise makes me hungry but when i dont exercise i usually stick between 1300 and 1450 and ive lost 40lbs so it works for me. And no im not hungry0
-
Aaron_K123 wrote: »I have that job too. I have a desk job. If I do nothing but my desk job, take the bus home, and sit in front of the TV I STILL get 5000 steps which if you have an activity tracker MFP will set you to lightly active or you will start accruing extra calories if you set to sedentary.
I know people think MFP sedentary means desk job but I'm telling you it doesn't act like that. Since people are using MFP it doesn't matter what they think sedentary means it matters what MFP sets your TDEE to if you select sedentary and what it does is barely budge it off your BMR which is like what you would be if you were bedridden, not walking around on occassion with a desk job.
I encourage everyone who doubts me on this to try it themselves. Play with the MFP calculator, figure out what your BMR is and set yourself to sedentary and see that it considers your TDEE to be close to your BMR. Set to lightly active and see that it only bumps up from BMR not that much which is probably much more accurate for what most people consider to be sedentary.
If you use fitbit... you should be at Sedentary and allow negative calories... It is what I do, and it works.
I have to walk extra in a day to hit my 8000 step goal.
0 -
In the last two months I did JJ Smith 10 day smoothie cleanse. I'm a foodie. I had self control issues with my eating habits. After finishing this cleanse I learned I can go without sweets, meat, carbs and junk food. I now do 1 to 2 smoothies a day that are low fat. Many smoothies are high in calories but the ones I make are under 160 calories. I eat fresh carrots, celery and cucumbers for my snacks. Almonds is another snack. Salad with homemade dressing or steamed veggies. I recently made the decision to cut out meat and evaluate how my body reacts. Everyday I don't win in keeping my calories under. Now I do my best to burn 500 to 1000 calories a day. I remind myself daily why it's important for me to get healthy. When I feel weak, I go online in a weight loss forum or watch before/after weight loss pictures from success stories.5
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K 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
- 388 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
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 910 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.2K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions