Why 1200?

What I understand was that the average person just living in a day burns about 1200 calories so they can eat and burn 1200 without gaining weight.

Starvation mode ツ please don't run me over.... NOPE haven't a clue!!!

isn't it something to do with BMR so... if my Basic Metabolic Rate meant I burnt off 1700 calories a day naturally. If I cut by 500 a day over the course of a week I'll have a deficit of 3500 which is a loss of 1 pound a week. And that is why you have to eat exercise calories back.
I dunno, I've read so many posts about starvation mode blah blah blah and BMR I just kinda thought up this myself due to calories in calories out.
I would like to know though if there is a scientific answer. Good question

http://www.fitsugar.com/Why-1200-Calories-Day-Important-When-Dieting-13080864

this is totally correct

When I questioned this a long time back someone said it 1200 female and 1500 male were considered the cut off for providing minimal nutrition for aid agencies. When people are under those numbers they are considered to be starving. Whether that is true or not, or whether it has any scientific basis I don't know. I doubt it does, but it seems like fairly appropriate numbers.

I do not have scientific proof, but Dr. Neal Barnard says to use the power of 10 to figure out your minimum caloric intake to control your binges. So if you want to be 130 pounds, you must eat at least 130x10=1300 calories a day or else your chances of binging are high.

http://www.acsm.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=ACSM_News_Releases&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&CONTENTID=12541

This article mentions both using the 10 calories per 1lb of bodyweight for women and 11 calories per 1lb of bodyweight as a minimum (an approach which I prefer) but also under the calorie restriction section that 1,200 is the minimum recommended.

I will try and find the 1999 study by the WHO which I believe was where the original recommendation came from.

Don't be silly and answer the question with exactly what the OP was looking for! They are having too much fun thinking someone just pulled it out of their *kitten*! :glasses:

http://www.acsm.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=ACSM_News_Releases&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&CONTENTID=12541

This article mentions both using the 10 calories per 1lb of bodyweight for women and 11 calories per 1lb of bodyweight as a minimum (an approach which I prefer) but also under the calorie restriction section that 1,200 is the minimum recommended.

I will try and find the 1999 study by the WHO which I believe was where the original recommendation came from.

Don't be silly and answer the question with exactly what the OP was looking for! They are having too much fun thinking someone just pulled it out of their *kitten*! :glasses:

This still doesn't explain why 1200 for everyone. It just throws out 1200 again, referencing it as a recommendation. I would be very interested to see the source study referenced. If anything,this just points out, again, that 1200 isn't appropriate for everyone. I'm about 160 lbs. Why 1200 for me? One of my friends is 95 lbs. Why 1200 for her?

This still doesn't explain why 1200 for everyone.

The short answer is that it isn't. It's a generic but safe guideline based on averages. Will there always be outliers? Well yeah.

Unfortunately, my pc is playing silly buggers so I can't access the WHO research but it seems they can be found here (2nd & 3rd PDFs)

I can't be sure as I can't open them though. Doh!

http://search.who.int/search?q=1200+calories&ie=utf8&site=default_collection&client=_en&proxystylesheet=_en&output=xml_no_dtd&oe=utf8

I've been at this healthy lifestyle for a while and I've seen 1200 as the magic number everywhere too. The best fact I have come across to understand how many calories is necessary is that our bodies burn about 100 calories for every 10 pounds just by being alive. So for a "normal woman" (whatever that means!) who is about 120 pounds, she should eat a net (total after exercising is taken out) of 1200 calories for healthy organ function. If this reasoning really is true than a 200 pound male should eat 2000 calories (sounds about right).

Of course since every body is different there is no magic number. Just eat healthy and try taking out certain types of foods that might be hindering your weight loss (complex carbs, processed foods). I just cut out dairy and it helped my get past a plateau and I lost 2 pounds last week.

There is a lot of crazy info out there so its really important to find out the facts for yourself, don't trust just anything you read (even this! i might be wrong too!)

It annoys me that so many people take that number and run with it. It's the BARE MINIMUM. Why would you eat the bare minimum when you could eat more?

I don't get this either. I am sure that if it was set at 1,000 calories people would still argue the legitimacy of the number.

I think that really, outside of metabolic disorders, the only classes of people who really need to eat at this level or below are morbidly obese people who are in immediate danger unless weight is reduced because of organ failure etc OR small and relatively light women who have very little room for maneouvre in terms of a workable calorie deficit.

Apart from that I think pretty much everyone can lose with an ACTUAL intake in excess of 1,200 (as opposed to a REPORTED intake of 1,200) The problem is patience. Everyone wants to be lean now or as quickly as possible...

But you don't UNDERSTAND! There's a wedding I've known about for a year that's now two weeks away and I need to drop 15 pounds before then!!!!!!!!! :sad: :sad: :sad: