1,200 Calorie Daily Goal Question
comom23
Posts: 12 Member
Wondering what comments people have heard when sharing with others you are eating 1,200 per day? When I tell people that is my goal through MFP, many seem sure that cannot be enough calories. Based on those reactions, I'm also looking for confirmation I am following this calorie deficit plan correctly. I'm 5'2", currently 169lbs, looking to get to 135-140. I've assumed the lower calorie goal I am assigned is due to my height and the fact I have a desk job (although I do have a daily step goal of 15,000). I am trying to follow 1.200 calories eaten per day on MFP, and 2,200 calories expended, according to Fitbit app. I figure that way if I'm off a little on either calculation, I should still be in deficit? Any thoughts/suggestions appreciated.
1
Replies
-
I'd try to get in a bit of cardio or increase your activity level a bit so you can eat closer to 1400. But 1200 for short, sedentary women is not all that rare.3
-
iv been on 1200 since 230 pounds, But on days i walk that much you definatly need to eat some more. 1200 is the minimum. At 1200 you need to eat your exercise calories back, 15,000 is not sedentary. When i walk alot ill bump my calories to 1400-1500 allowing for an extra small meal.
And as for the comments, Yeah people seem to have alot to say over my food. Aparently im starving myself2 -
This content has been removed.
-
Oh yeah I didn't see your steps. That's not sedentary. Try lightly active. I get 12-14k steps and I fit nicely into the lightly active caterory.0
-
Thanks for comments! Nice to have a place to ask questions. I stumble to react to people's strong reactions to my calorie consumption:) I just switched my activity level to lightly active and I'm still at 1,200 calories, so sticking with it. Once I got used to weighing and tracking food, it's really not so difficult.0
-
Thanks for comments! Nice to have a place to ask questions. I stumble to react to people's strong reactions to my calorie consumption:) I just switched my activity level to lightly active and I'm still at 1,200 calories, so sticking with it. Once I got used to weighing and tracking food, it's really not so difficult.
It didn't up your calories?
Just don't talk about your calorie goal with people. No one gets it and everyone thinks they know it all. Also, I quickly learned that no one cares about your calories or macros. That's why we are all up in here. And instagram lol.2 -
Thanks for comments! Nice to have a place to ask questions. I stumble to react to people's strong reactions to my calorie consumption:) I just switched my activity level to lightly active and I'm still at 1,200 calories, so sticking with it. Once I got used to weighing and tracking food, it's really not so difficult.
yeah nothing wrong with 1200, As i said just have an extra snack especially if your extra hungry as thats alot of steps. Dont shy away from extra few hundred when needed some days!0 -
I've heard enough comments from people about my eating habits to make me swear off talking about my eating habits. When people ask how I'm losing weight, all I tell them is, "Eating less."
9 -
I don't share my calorie goal with others..2
-
If you're getting 15,000 steps a day, then surely you can eat more than 1200 calories. Do you have your fitbit synced to mfp?2
-
Anecdotally...
I'm 5'2" and 119#, and I lose at 1400 with a sedentary job (4000-5,000 steps per day). 1200 may be okay for you based on your height, but I'm guessing with your steps/day you may be able to eat more.
I'm also guessing you set to losing at the most aggressive rate (because I sure did at first). Your goals are your goals. I would recommend if it gets tough to up it 100-200 cals with a few high protein snacks because that helped me a ton.
There is a really nasty stigma on the 1200 number and I'm one of the first people to jump on it normally...but you're my height and I get it. That's where I was at for a while too. Just listen to your body.1 -
I do have my Fitbit synced, but it is not adding any calories to my total - I must not have something set correctly.0
-
-
I'm your same height, and whenever I select a goal more aggressive than losing 0.5/wk, it puts me down to 1200, unless my activity level is set really high.
1200 isn't terrible when you're shorter, but with that said, I was losing (slowly, but losing) on 1400 with 4,000-5,000 steps a day and I'm 119#. I could manage 1200, but to be honest I was never strong or healthy on that high of a deficit. I added some high protein snacks and kept it up around 1300-1400.1 -
I'm 5'2, lightly active as a baseline (I'm a nurse, on my feet all day but light activity). I log extra exercise which is jogging/walking hilly trails, cycling or mountain biking probably 4 times a week as extra exercise.
MFP also allocates me 1200.0 -
I stopped talking to people other than my husband about my diet. I'm 5'4" and started at 145-148 (I would fluctuate). I'm only aiming to lose 15-20 lbs, and because that's such a small amount, I have to cut and count very closely and precisely. I was told by my family and friends that I wasn't eating enough and "look fine." The fact of the matter is that I am 4 months in and a look better, feel better, and I am happy. I am not starving at 1200 calories because I eat low calorie yet filling meals that I enjoy. I am sedentary, I do not have a job as my husband is military and currently in between jobs/locations and I workout 3-4 times a week for an hour, which I log and eat back half of my calories if I'm hungry.
Just look past the comments. As long as you're satisfied and see your plan as working long term, then you can ignore them.2 -
I see posters with high counts in this thread yet wrong information getting pushed through?
15,000 steps is NOT sedentary and is NOT lightly active.
15,000 steps challenges and at times surpasses MFPs VERY ACTIVE setting.
No need to believe me, even though I regularly get extra calories over and above MFP's very active setting once i hit 15,000 steps... there exist published studies that back up 12,500 steps as a cut off for labelling someone "very active" https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14715035
1200 Calories is MFPs minimum.
If you've told MFP you want to lose 2lbs a week, which means a deficit of 1000Cal a day, MFP will spit out 1200Cal regardless of whether it thinks you will lose 1g or 907.2g, i.e. regardless of what it ACTUALLY thinks your deficit will be.
Here is an imaginary progression:
Sedentary NEAT 1700
Lightly Active NEAT 1900
Active NEAT 2100
Very active NEAT 2300
MFP (assuming you ask for 2lbs a week) will keep spitting out 1200 Cal until you hit "very active". At very active it will spit out 1300.
Note MFP base setup assumes NEAT and expects you to eat back 100% of your ACTUAL calories spent on purposeful exercise over and above your NEAT.
Note that substituting TDEE for NEAT above works perfectly fine (in fact I do it all the time) and is what happens when you connect your Fitbit/device to MFP. The "exercise" adjustment you get from Fitbit is NOT AN EXERCISE. It is the difference between what MFP predicted your TDEE was going to be and what Fitbit/or device calculated your TDEE to be during the day.
Having said the above. In part your 1200 Cal target is predicated on your choice of 2lbs a week as your deficit. A deficit that is appropriate for someone who is morbidly obese. Is it actually appropriate for YOU?
You are trying to create a deficit that is LARGER than 25% of your TDEE AND you're trying to lose more than 1% of your bodyweight a week.
NEITHER is great!
20% deficit off their actual TDEE is just about as much as most people should be trying to lose at. 25% if they are classified as obese and have the fat deposits that go with that classification.
While we're throwing random studies around here's one that discusses a rate of loss of 0.7% per week as more muscle sparing than a rate of loss of 1.4% a week. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21558571
In closing and in brief.
1200 is not always necessary to lose weight.
While 1200 MAY be necessary to lose weight fast, losing weight fast is not always good.
Note that small deficits make it very difficult to discern weight loss.
High levels of exercise make it very difficult to discern weight loss.
Monthly cyclical weight fluctuations make it very difficult to discern weight loss.
A lot of people would benefit from using a trending weight application or web site to get a better understanding of their weight level as opposed to relying on weight "snapshots" at single points of time.
If you look through the forums carefully, for all the many (usually) ladies who swear that 1200 is the only way they can lose weight you will also find some brave, and at times very hard working, women who lose weight at more than 1200. And yes, some relatively very few people who due to health and physical limitations have no option but to lose at 1200, or less.23 -
I'm on 1000 calories and it took me 6 months to loose 16kg (35 pounds), YES, sometime I go over it......but will over try to stay on 1000 most days.0
-
Thanks for comments! Nice to have a place to ask questions. I stumble to react to people's strong reactions to my calorie consumption:) I just switched my activity level to lightly active and I'm still at 1,200 calories, so sticking with it. Once I got used to weighing and tracking food, it's really not so difficult.
Probably because of the rate of loss you entered. Did you say 2 pounds per week? MFP will go no lower than 1200 for women, so even if the math doesn't add up for you to lose 2 lbs per month, 1200 is still your allowance.
The suggested rate of loss per week depends on how much you have to lose. The less to lose, the smaller the loss per week. Less than 25 lbs, then .5 pounds per week (ish).
Many people come on and want to lose as fast as possible, but that's not necessarily the healthiest nor the most sustainable way.
See what works and be honest with yourself.5 -
My thought has always been to try to lose eating as much as I can. 1200 calories works for weight loss..no doubt. My fear is that ..from my reading on here... when you lose on 1200..you're pretty much stuck with a low maintenance calorie allowance..or regain happens.4
-
15k steps is usually how much I get to fit the very active setting.For me, lightly active happens to be around 7k steps, active around 11k and very active around 14k.2
-
I've been on 1200 calories for months - 5'3, fairly sedentary, have gone from 224 to 162 and my calorie goal is still identical. I find telling others about my calorie goals can cause concern - everyone's got the infamous 2000 in their minds - my TDEE is around 1800 so I would outright gain on that!
If you don't feel comfortable eating that low, maybe adjust your goals on MFP or try working out a more personalised amount from your TDEE.3 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »15k steps is usually how much I get to fit the very active setting.For me, lightly active happens to be around 7k steps, active around 11k and very active around 14k.
Where do you find this information please? Does this relate to when your Fitbit steps are given back as exercise calories? Sometimes I'll do 7k steps and be given 0 calories, but I did 15k the other day and was given over 400. Confused.0 -
Makeitso39 wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »15k steps is usually how much I get to fit the very active setting.For me, lightly active happens to be around 7k steps, active around 11k and very active around 14k.
Where do you find this information please? Does this relate to when your Fitbit steps are given back as exercise calories? Sometimes I'll do 7k steps and be given 0 calories, but I did 15k the other day and was given over 400. Confused.
Yes, it's what Fitbit gives me. These are the averages from experience, the average cutoff where fitbit starts giving me extra calories above set activity level. If you have a heart rate model the variance can be high. Generally, depending on my speed of walking/running, very active can be anywhere from 12k to 15k steps, but most days hover at around 14k steps for very active. Faster stepping or doing lots of sprints takes it down a notch.
If it gives you 0 calories for 7k, this means your current activity level is set up to support 7k steps without giving you extra calories and would need to be lowered to get extra exercise calories on 7k. In other words, those first 7k (if it's a true zero and you have negative adjustment enabled), are already accounted for in activity level and is exactly the amount of steps this activity level expects you to take, and you are likely set as lightly active. Any activity above that gives you extra calories like is the case with 15k.0 -
Thank you @amusedmonkey that clears up some of the mystery. I don't have negative calories enabled though.0
-
Makeitso39 wrote: »Thank you @amusedmonkey that clears up some of the mystery. I don't have negative calories enabled though.
Then 7k steps is likely a bit too low for your chosen activity level. As soon as you start getting extra calories, even if it's just one calorie, then you are being active enough for your chosen activity level.1 -
I've been on 1200 calories for months - 5'3, fairly sedentary, have gone from 224 to 162 and my calorie goal is still identical. I find telling others about my calorie goals can cause concern - everyone's got the infamous 2000 in their minds - my TDEE is around 1800 so I would outright gain on that!
If you don't feel comfortable eating that low, maybe adjust your goals on MFP or try working out a more personalised amount from your TDEE.
I agree I also have been on 1200 c a day since Sept. (5'6") sw 224 cw 169.2
Just had a checkup and all my numbers are looking great. I rarely hungry but I am always sure to eat 3 meals plus snacks and maybe a shake. If I am hungry on a particular day I will have a snack. I get about 10,000 steps a day, maybe 4-5 of them are active steps. But of course I'm older.0 -
We've kind of bounced around the important part.
At 169 lbs, looking to lose 30-35, A TWO POUND PER WEEK RATE OF LOSS IS TOO AGGRESSIVE.
Dial that back to 1 lb per week and see what the calculator gives you.
Losing at that rate at your size will mean losing too much lean body mass, and that means losing muscle. Some of it could be very important muscle, you know, like heart muscle.
If you are burning 2,200 a day, then eat ~1,700 for a safe weight loss.
Please.5 -
Tacklewasher wrote: »We've kind of bounced around the important part.
At 169 lbs, looking to lose 30-35, A TWO POUND PER WEEK RATE OF LOSS IS TOO AGGRESSIVE.
Dial that back to 1 lb per week and see what the calculator gives you.
Losing at that rate at your size will mean losing too much lean body mass, and that means losing muscle. Some of it could be very important muscle, you know, like heart muscle.
If you are burning 2,200 a day, then eat ~1,700 for a safe weight loss.
Please.
This is not too aggressive. She is 5'2". And for some, a few weeks of 2lb weight loss can actually help them stick to a diet.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