1,200 Calorie Daily Goal Question

2»

Replies

  • comom23
    comom23 Posts: 12 Member
    Thank you so much for the thoughtful responses! You all are correct, I was set at a 2lb/wk loss. When I start a journey, I'm usually a little too aggressive. Along with following MFP, I started a step challenge through work, hence my 15,000 steps/day. Based on comments, I have adjusted to 1 lb/week and "active" (as long as I'm committed to those 15,000). It did up calories to 1,680. Will give that a try. Thanks again - slow and steady wins the race!
  • x_Vicky_x_86
    x_Vicky_x_86 Posts: 37 Member
    Just be careful, I was on 1200 most days of the week (had treats on weekends), I'm 5'2 as well and do around 10-12k steps a day as well as walking 3 days a week for 1/2 hour a time (walking the dog), I think it's ok so long as you are getting all the nutrients you need within that calorie limit, that is the most important thing as I'm learning the hard way, I think cutting mine so low for so long without tracking what nutrients I was getting has caused problems with me now wanting to start a family, it's not 100% been said it is that but it could well have added to my lack of periods at the moment, they say 1200 is the very minimum, but your body needs a certain amount of calories for all of its basic functions else it starts to cancel out the less urgent ones, just take care of yourself.
  • CattOfTheGarage
    CattOfTheGarage Posts: 2,745 Member
    The thing to remember about 1200 calories is that that does not include exercise and if you don't log and eat back exercise then you are in danger of undereating.

    (in your case this does not apply to your steps as you have taken account of those in your activity level, but it will apply to any other, intentional exercise).

    Hopefully you will find 1680 easier.
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 28,052 Member
    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.

    You beat me to it.

    @comom23 with only 30-35 pounds to lose, a rate of two pounds per week is too aggressive. Drop it down to 1 pound per week and when you get to 25 pounds from goal, drop it down to a half a pound per week.

    In addition to losing muscle mass, under-eating can also cause hair loss. This doesn't happen until months after the time of under-eating, and can take a very long time to bounce back from.
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 34,216 Member
    edited February 2017
    What's really important is not so much the calorie level per se, but one's actual rate of weight loss. The calculators (like MFP's) give us a starting calorie estimate to target a particular loss rate, but we can differ a bit (some of us a lot) from the averages the calculators are based on.

    The typical rule of thumb is to avoid losing more than 1% of your body weight per week, possibly less as one gets close to goal. The underlying rationale is that research suggests one can only metabolize a certain number of calories per day per pound of fat on one's body (30-some calories per pound of fat per day, if I recall correctly). Losing more than that risks unnecessary loss of lean body mass along with fat, since one's body will make up the deficit somehow. For most people, 1% leaves a margin for insurance. But, as one approaches goal, one has less body fat available to metabolize, so it makes sense to gradually reduce the loss rate.

    1200 isn't magically bad, or magically good. One does see it adopted by "pedal to the metal" folks here, since it's the minimum MFP will assign to women, but it's appropriate for some. For me, as a 59 y/o at 5'5" and 150-something pounds, I got 1200 to lose when I first signed up. I quickly discovered that it was too low for me - I lost too fast (beyond 1% average per week in one particular month), and got weak/fatigued. Obviously, I corrected course. OTOH, I've seen other women who did not lose too fast at 1200.

    What matters most is how you feel. Your actual loss rate is the best leading indicator of whether you're on a sensible course toward continuing to feel great. Flipping out about any specific calorie level may just be symbol-reactive, but it does suggest that people are concerned about one's well-being, which at root is a Good Thing.
  • WinoGelato
    WinoGelato Posts: 13,454 Member
    bbell1985 wrote: »
    comom23 wrote: »
    I do have my Fitbit synced, but it is not adding any calories to my total - I must not have something set correctly.

    You don't need to sync it. Just set yourself as lightly active.

    Why wouldn't she sync it?
  • PAV8888
    PAV8888 Posts: 14,242 Member
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    A wise rabbit used to say, "The winner is the one who eats the most and still reaches their goal".

    +1 for the wise rabbit!
  • jen_092
    jen_092 Posts: 254 Member
    For what it's worth, you can set up a custom calorie goal! I didn't like any of the ones MFP spit out so I made my own after researching a good estimate for my TDEE. I track my own stats and I've been losing 1.25 lb per week, eating 1650 cals, which I'm very happy with.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories