We are pleased to announce that as of March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor has been introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!
1000-1200 calories, anyone?
Replies
-
For what it's worth, since I've started counting calories (when I was around 186 pounds, which was not my starting weight) until now, I've always eaten (at least) 1200 a day, but I try not to go over 1400. I'm 5'8" and I work out 4-5 days a week, and I feel full and content. I'm not tired and starving all day. I focus on eating plenty of protein and healthy fats which keep me fuller longer. I've also worked on readjusting my hunger cues and figuring out when I'm ACTUALLY hungry vs being bored at my sedentary, awful office job. I measure everything so I know what I'm eating. I find that 1200-1300 is plenty for me, and I always work in a treat every day.
Minus my last semester of college/moving/starting a horrific job weight gain that I'm losing now, I've lost 69 pounds, so I find it sustainable.3 -
trigden1991 wrote: »
A sweeping statement made with no proof. People can, and do, eat below 1200 calories and are healthy.
I live in a truck and don't get alot of exercise and my doctor told me not to go below 1200 there's my proof2 -
1200 calories - I am hangry just thinking about it!!! (Runs to get a snack). I eat 1800 calories a day and I am loosing weight. Sometimes I eat more depending on my workout/activity. I am petite and over 40.1
-
3rdof7sisters wrote: »
The only way to sustain weight loss, is to not eat more calories than you burn.
Depending on where you get your information, anywhere from 80% to 97% of people who lose weight, gain it all (or even more back) within 5 years.
Point is, all anyone can do, is what works for themselves, and that involves eating less calories than you are burning to lose weight, and not eating more than you burn to maintain. What is the healthy, or unhealthy way to lose weight is something each of us should be consulting with our doctors about. No one on any internet forum can know what is right for someone else. There are many factors that go into this. Every diet will advise you to consult with your doctor before starting a weight loss program.
It is sheer arrogance to presume that you know best for anyone besides yourself. What qualifies you to decide that someone else is wrong? How can you possibly know? As long as you are eating at a calorie level that is safe, and have arrived at this number by consulting with a professional, how can anyone else tell you you are wrong, without know your medical history or anything about you.
If your program is working for you, that is fantastic and good for you. Unfortunately, we are not all the same, and that is a fact.
The voice of experience is ignored at one's own risk.
I agree with Ruth.
I've dieted on and off for over 40 years.
Here's the greater issue behind the argument for eating more, particularly as you get closer to goal:
I personally found that as I went further along in my weight loss, fitness became a bigger part of my life, and as I had less body fat, I found I needed more calories to fuel my activity while still losing weight. I wasn't willing to sacrifice running performance to maintain a large deficit.
You are right, this might not be the same for you.
I do know that both Ruth and WinoGelato are very active people. Perhaps that is the difference here. Those of us who are active know what a difference those calories make, particularly once you start to lean out and have less and less body fat to burn to fuel your activity.7 -
annacole94 wrote: »here is the thing: even if you are a special unicorn that MUST eat 1200 calories to lose half a pound a week, or to maintain, it is irresponsible to tell someone that is just beginning a weight loss journey that they are, too.
When we go off on you in this threads, it's not because we care what you do. You do what you want, you don't want advice and you don't take it. It's when you offer your experience as relevant to some poor new person who now has validation to continue a very extreme level of deprivation that is very likely to lead to failure.
It's bad advice. So it gets hit with criticism. If you said "I tried 1500 calories first, and after a month that didn't work for me, so then I backed it down," you wouldn't get the criticism. That story isn't how it gets put on the newbies.
The OP specifically asked if there were folks out there that fall into that range. And clearly, there are. I, and a few others, responded. I've been at this a long time - maintaining my weight - so I do have experience, for MY situation. OP was asking about that situation, specifically. Not sure why others feel it necessary to jump in and comment to those of us that clearly are doing fine and need no advice, and did not ask for it. Yes, I do know what I am doing, and it works for me. That is all I should need to say. I try to stay polite and respectful here.
7 -
Wait a minute. Why would you say going below 1200 calories is healthy, when that is below most people's BMR, the amount that sustains a person who is sedentary?
Please give examples.
Oh good grief.
2 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »The voice of experience is ignored at one's own risk.
I agree with Ruth.
I've dieted on and off for over 40 years.
Here's the greater issue behind the argument for eating more, particularly as you get closer to goal:
I personally found that as I went further along in my weight loss, fitness became a bigger part of my life, and as I had less body fat, I found I needed more calories to fuel my activity while still losing weight. I wasn't willing to sacrifice running performance to maintain a large deficit.
You are right, this might not be the same for you.
I do know that both Ruth and WinoGelato are very active people. Perhaps that is the difference here. Those of us who are active know what a difference those calories make, particularly once you start to lean out and have less and less body fat to burn to fuel your activity.
I agree - exercise does make a huge difference. I work out regularly at the gym, and walk/bike/elliptical/stepmill on my lunch hour, every day. It's normal for me to do 150 flights of stairs in my 30 minutes at the gym (have to leave time for a shower!). If I walk, I make sure I cover 3 miles. I have done 6 half-marathons, and many shorter races. I used to run every day, but I had a torn meniscus repair this past summer and I'm not sure if my knee will ever let me get back to running, so I have to find other ways. I routinely bike 15-20 miles on the weekend, and have done as much as 35. Fitness is a normal part of my day and should be for everyone. 0 -
fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »
I agree - exercise does make a huge difference. I work out regularly at the gym, and walk/bike/elliptical/stepmill on my lunch hour, every day. It's normal for me to do 150 flights of stairs in my 30 minutes at the gym (have to leave time for a shower!). If I walk, I make sure I cover 3 miles. I have done 6 half-marathons, and many shorter races. I used to run every day, but I had a torn meniscus repair this past summer and I'm not sure if my knee will ever let me get back to running, so I have to find other ways. I routinely bike 15-20 miles on the weekend, and have done as much as 35. Fitness is a normal part of my day and should be for everyone.
I'm not trying to jump into this *thing* at all, but to me, this genuinely prompts the question, if you weren't doing all of this exercise, would you not be able to eat then? 8 -
fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »
The OP specifically asked if there were folks out there that fall into that range. And clearly, there are. I, and a few others, responded. I've been at this a long time - maintaining my weight - so I do have experience, for MY situation. OP was asking about that situation, specifically. Not sure why others feel it necessary to jump in and comment to those of us that clearly are doing fine and need no advice, and did not ask for it. Yes, I do know what I am doing, and it works for me. That is all I should need to say. I try to stay polite and respectful here.
Because there is generally a concern that people are eating at 1200, and/or are going for an overly aggressive weight loss that could be detrimental to *them* (not all). There are people that feel they're going to go for 1200 so they can loose all the weight they can as fast as they can and end up being tired, emotional, and seriously hungry, when if they have an 'appropriate' deficit, they may not feel this way. There are some people that can do it, some as you've seen that can't.
Plus this is forums, additional information as to why we do things (ie fueling appropriately for exercise) and opinions are always going to be given - you have to learn to weed through some information (while figuring out what is right, what is opinion, what is not contextual to you, and what is complete hogwash).6 -
I tried 1200 for a week, but it was a complete nightmare. After reading and learning from the guru's here at MFP, I found that by increasing my calorie goal, and moving more, my life wasn't so horrible anymore. Still lost over 60 pounds, but slower, and without the hanger.2
-
Hi I'm short at 5'1" so on 1200. I eat back my exercise calories. A couple of days a week I can do 1200 but others it's real challenge. I think 1000 would mean saying no to the odd glass of wine or treat that keeps me sane but on track.2
-
fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »
I agree - exercise does make a huge difference. I work out regularly at the gym, and walk/bike/elliptical/stepmill on my lunch hour, every day. It's normal for me to do 150 flights of stairs in my 30 minutes at the gym (have to leave time for a shower!). If I walk, I make sure I cover 3 miles. I have done 6 half-marathons, and many shorter races. I used to run every day, but I had a torn meniscus repair this past summer and I'm not sure if my knee will ever let me get back to running, so I have to find other ways. I routinely bike 15-20 miles on the weekend, and have done as much as 35. Fitness is a normal part of my day and should be for everyone.
You said upthread that your maintenance calories were 1200-1300? And that's your TDEE, including all this exercise? What is your height and weight?2 -
fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »
The OP specifically asked if there were folks out there that fall into that range. And clearly, there are. I, and a few others, responded. I've been at this a long time - maintaining my weight - so I do have experience, for MY situation. OP was asking about that situation, specifically. Not sure why others feel it necessary to jump in and comment to those of us that clearly are doing fine and need no advice, and did not ask for it. Yes, I do know what I am doing, and it works for me. That is all I should need to say. I try to stay polite and respectful here.
If I may, yes, she asked for experiences of others in that range. But later, she mentioned the reason she is looking to be in that range is because she desires to lose 2 lbs/week, not because she finds she *can't* lose on a higher calorie allowance. I think that makes a big difference in the kind of advice being offered.3 -
Because there is generally a concern that people are eating at 1200, and/or are going for an overly aggressive weight loss that could be detrimental to *them* (not all). There are people that feel they're going to go for 1200 so they can loose all the weight they can as fast as they can and end up being tired, emotional, and seriously hungry, when if they have an 'appropriate' deficit, they may not feel this way. There are some people that can do it, some as you've seen that can't.
Plus this is forums, additional information as to why we do things (ie fueling appropriately for exercise) and opinions are always going to be given - you have to learn to weed through some information (while figuring out what is right, what is opinion, what is not contextual to you, and what is complete hogwash).
All that is fine and good. After maintaining my weight all these years I think I can weed through the hogwash. But for others to imply that my own experience is hogwash, is definitely NOT fine. That was my point.
Back to the OP now.3 -
If I may, yes, she asked for experiences of others in that range. But later, she mentioned the reason she is looking to be in that range is because she desires to lose 2 lbs/week, not because she finds she *can't* lose on a higher calorie allowance. I think that makes a big difference in the kind of advice being offered.
Well that is true. I actually missed that little nugget. Good point. 1 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »
The voice of experience is ignored at one's own risk.
I agree with Ruth.
I've dieted on and off for over 40 years.
Here's the greater issue behind the argument for eating more, particularly as you get closer to goal:
I personally found that as I went further along in my weight loss, fitness became a bigger part of my life, and as I had less body fat, I found I needed more calories to fuel my activity while still losing weight. I wasn't willing to sacrifice running performance to maintain a large deficit.
You are right, this might not be the same for you.
I do know that both Ruth and WinoGelato are very active people. Perhaps that is the difference here. Those of us who are active know what a difference those calories make, particularly once you start to lean out and have less and less body fat to burn to fuel your activity.
Thank you for telling me I am inactive, but no, that is not it. I have gone to the gym every single day (missed 2 because of snow storms) for over two years. Have had a fit bit for 4 years and get at least 15K every single day. Lost zip weight until I started logging here and cut calorie consumption to 1200 calories from 1600. Lost -23 since 1/1/17, but of course now I was told that is losing too fast. Why is it so difficult to believe that someone can not lose weight eating more calories than you think they should be eating.
The voice of experience is ignored at one's own risk, but that is your experience, not mine.
1 -
WinoGelato wrote: »
You said upthread that your maintenance calories were 1200-1300? And that's your TDEE, including all this exercise? What is your height and weight?
If anything, this poster is a cautionary tale about eating too little for too long, and then having the fun of doing that forever. This isn't a story about how eating 1200 calories has a happy ending.7 -
3rdof7sisters wrote: »
Thank you for telling me I am inactive, but no, that is not it. I have gone to the gym every single day (missed 2 because of snow storms) for over two years. Have had a fit bit for 4 years and get at least 15K every single day. Lost zip weight until I started logging here and cut calorie consumption to 1200 calories from 1600. Lost -23 since 1/1/17, but of course now I was told that is losing too fast. Why is it so difficult to believe that someone can not lose weight eating more calories than you think they should be eating.
The voice of experience is ignored at one's own risk, but that is your experience, not mine.
What this tells me is that when you thought you were eating 1600 cals, you were actually eating quite a bit more and that's why you weren't losing. You said since Jan you have cut your calories to 1200 and started logging here. You are losing ~3 lbs/week, so that means you are eating at a deficit of 1500 calories from your TDEE. If you applied the same diligence to logging that you have since January, only aiming for the 1600 cals of before, or even higher, you should still be losing, just at a slower rate.
Mathematically it's impossible for you to maintain at 1600 but lose 3 lbs/week at 1200.17 -
Thanks for the mention @GottaBurnEmAll
I think despite a few of us having a lot of experience in this area our advice falls on deaf ears...sometimes I wonder why I still try to give people sound advice...
And you're right, I eat to fuel an active life
5 -
fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »
I agree - exercise does make a huge difference. I work out regularly at the gym, and walk/bike/elliptical/stepmill on my lunch hour, every day. It's normal for me to do 150 flights of stairs in my 30 minutes at the gym (have to leave time for a shower!). If I walk, I make sure I cover 3 miles. I have done 6 half-marathons, and many shorter races. I used to run every day, but I had a torn meniscus repair this past summer and I'm not sure if my knee will ever let me get back to running, so I have to find other ways. I routinely bike 15-20 miles on the weekend, and have done as much as 35. Fitness is a normal part of my day and should be for everyone.
You do all of that and you're eating 1200? I know you're a little bit older than me (I'm going to be turning 55 this year), but even if you are an oulier, no one is *that* much of an outlier.
There's another poster on these forums who is your age, very short, very light, and also active, and her maintenance is around 1500, IIRC.
I think it might be time for you to not be so blithe about "Oh, I've done this for years" and give some thought to the fact that you might have some metabolic adaptation going on.9 -
Wow, OP, you hit on a hot topic!
You asked if anyone out there has tried it & how it went. My TDEE is ~1750, so that is >500 cal deficit for me. Honestly, I can do 1200 for a couple days (or even 1000 for a day) if I hit certain macro minimums (25g fiber, 50g fat, 100g protein) and feel pretty good. If I'm eating low not on purpose (e.g. travel, not enough time or options), I'm probably not hitting my macro minimums but nonetheless fine for a day or two ...but will be pretty darn hungry by day 3. Conversely, if I've feasted like a king one day, I'm fine eating light the day after. A big deficit on isolated days, a la intermittent fasting, is no problem. When averaged over a week, though, an average daily deficit >250 is more that I can sustain. I am a binge waiting to happen if I'm averaging 1200.
tl;dr: A day here & there = no problem but 1200 (500cal deficit) is not sustainable for me, personally.3 -
WinoGelato wrote: »
What this tells me is that when you thought you were eating 1600 cals, you were actually eating quite a bit more and that's why you weren't losing. You said since Jan you have cut your calories to 1200 and started logging here. You are losing ~3 lbs/week, so that means you are eating at a deficit of 1500 calories from your TDEE. If you applied the same diligence to logging that you have since January, only aiming for the 1600 cals of before, or even higher, you should still be losing, just at a slower rate.
Mathematically it's impossible for you to maintain at 1600 but lose 3 lbs/week at 1200.
Seriously? I am done. You know nothing about me. This is not about mathematics. I know many people in my age group that are eating, or have eaten 1200 to lose. It is not uncommon. Some of us do not fit into your mold. I do weigh my food. I have dropped my calories to 1200 and am losing weight, and this was my doctors suggestion who also happens to be a weight loss specialist.
3 -
The laws of physics tend to apply to everyone in this universe; if you're losing 3 lb/week at 1200 calories, you're at a 1,500 cal/day deficit. That means that if you actually ate 1600/day, you'd lose 2lb/week. Heck, you could go with 2100 cal/day and lose 1 lb a week.
You do you. I'm glad you have medical supervision if your plan is to lose 3 lb/week indefinitely. I hope you have some support as you get close to goal, as that's a huge risk for regain.10 -
3rdof7sisters wrote: »
Thank you for telling me I am inactive, but no, that is not it. I have gone to the gym every single day (missed 2 because of snow storms) for over two years. Have had a fit bit for 4 years and get at least 15K every single day. Lost zip weight until I started logging here and cut calorie consumption to 1200 calories from 1600. Lost -23 since 1/1/17, but of course now I was told that is losing too fast. Why is it so difficult to believe that someone can not lose weight eating more calories than you think they should be eating.
The voice of experience is ignored at one's own risk, but that is your experience, not mine.
I just allowed that it might be different for you, I never presumed anything about your exercise habits.
If you weren't losing at 1600, and you suddenly lost 2.5 pounds a week at 1200, all that says is that you weren't counting calories accurately at 1600, and likely aren't at 1200.
Here's the math - period of weight loss (rounded): 9 weeks
Calorie differential per week : 2,800 calories
Weight difference based on caloric differential
(weeks x weekly differential/3500) : 7.2
In other words, if all your logging were truly accurate, you still would have been losing weight at 1600. The difference of a 23 pound loss at 1200 calories for 9 weeks and 1600 calories for 9 weeks is not no weight loss, it's 7.2 pounds.8 -
WinoGelato wrote: »
You said upthread that your maintenance calories were 1200-1300? And that's your TDEE, including all this exercise? What is your height and weight?
I don't get into the TDEE thing. I simply track calories (and yes protein and a few other things). Yes maintenance for me, at 138-140 pounds, has always been 1200-1300 calories, but note that on those day where I did something like a half-marathon, obviously I ate more that day. I don't do those runs anymore, sadly, but mentioned them simply to explain that I AM active, other than my job. I have a sit-down job, always have - for over 30 years (I am 61), and am on my butt for 8-9 hours a day, so I have always figured that was why I fall at that low end of the calorie scale. So to answer your question, for my normal days, cardio and gym, yes that is my maintenance. I fell off the logging wagon a couple of years ago and that is why I am using MFP (also have to use it for work) to log. I lost 10, but went right back to my bad habits (snacking!), and gained it back plus a few more. I was averaging about 1500 -1700 calories a day - DOH. And maybe 155-160 is fine for others at my height, but it is NOT fine for me. I know where I am happiest at, and feel best at. So back at the strict logging again to get back where i need to be, and stay there. I am 5'7", at 153 right now.
But enough about me. This thread is not about me. Back to the OP...please.0 -
annacole94 wrote: »If anything, this poster is a cautionary tale about eating too little for too long, and then having the fun of doing that forever. This isn't a story about how eating 1200 calories has a happy ending.
LOL. Right.
0 -
annacole94 wrote: »
If anything, this poster is a cautionary tale about eating too little for too long, and then having the fun of doing that forever. This isn't a story about how eating 1200 calories has a happy ending.
This.2 -
OP - this is my second time seriously losing weight. The first time I stuck to the 1200/day pretty strict. I didn't slow my progress down when I was under 20 to go, and I burned my self out and quit. AKA gained all back plus some.
I'm still, generally sticking to 1200/day for at least 3 or 4 days a week. I workout regularly, both cardio and heavy lifting and running on the weekends. If I'm hungry I eat more. If I feel like my energy is low, I eat more. On the weekends, I eat more. When all is said and done - my net is likely 1500 - 1800. When I get closer to goal, ie 20 to go... I'll slow my progress down to 1 or .5/week loss. I've realized it's important to prepare for the end goal just as hard as you worked to get to the goal.
You just have to find that little magic formula that works for you.0 -
I think the OP 'left the building' a long time ago lol2
-
3rdof7sisters wrote: »
Seriously? I am done. You know nothing about me. This is not about mathematics. I know many people in my age group that are eating, or have eaten 1200 to lose. It is not uncommon. Some of us do not fit into your mold. I do weigh my food. I have dropped my calories to 1200 and am losing weight, and this was my doctors suggestion who also happens to be a weight loss specialist.
Weight loss is always about mathematics... whether you choose to believe it or not.
I don't have a mold. I understand that there is a subset of the population who are older, sedentary, and very petite for whom going as low as 1200 cals is a requirement. You have described an active lifestyle and now, after logging diligently, are losing weight rapidly. You can feel free to ignore this, as I know you are not looking for advice, but you absolutely would still be losing if you were logging the way you are now but eating at a higher calorie amount. You would be losing more slowly, yes. Depending on how much weight you have to lose, you and your doctor may have chosen a more aggressive plan, but again - mathematically, it is impossible that you would be not losing ANYTHING at 1600 but suddenly start losing rapidly by only cutting 400 cals/day.
13
I didn't bother replying to the comment on my comment LOL - there are those of us who lose weight the healthy and sustainable way (and wonder of wonders we succeed long term) and those who yoyo between eating too little and then re-gaining when they end their 'diet' duh! so I think I'll bow out apart from looking at newer comments and enjoy a bit of eye rolling and shaking head moments 
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394.6K Introduce Yourself
- 44K Getting Started
- 260.5K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.1K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.7K Fitness and Exercise
- 444 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 4.1K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 1.3K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.8K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions