Is 1,200 calories healthy?

Options
2

Replies

  • Choromyslny
    Choromyslny Posts: 6 Member
    Options
    lynn_glenmont wrote: »
    Choromyslny wrote: »
    lynn_glenmont wrote: »
    1200 calories isn't MFP's goal. It's the goal you told MFP to give you, probably by choosing an overly aggressive weight loss goal (2 lbs a week?) and by categorizing yourself as sedentary when you may not be (sedentary means you spend most of the day sitting or lying down, stirring to do little more than attend to your physical needs -- eating, personal grooming, and such).

    Like I said in a comment before, I set MFP to “active.” Also I have it at 1.5 pounds a week.

    I see that you also said you're not overweight. 1.5 lbs a week is too aggressive for someone who is not overweight.

    Does "not overweight" mean that you are actually underweight?

    No, I’m not underweight. I’m 123 lbs and 5’3.” I just want to lose about 10 lbs which would still put me in my healthy weight range.
  • deannalfisher
    deannalfisher Posts: 5,600 Member
    Options
    she is also heavily active with her job, so recomp may give her more sustained energy through the day
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    You may be more active than what MFP is calling active, and when you are in the middle of the normal BMI trying to get to the bottom 1.5 lb/week is too aggressive (at least when you are only 5'3). I'd start by changing it to 1 lb/week (maybe even .5) and monitoring how you are losing. I'd also eat more if you feel week or dizzy -- that's a big tipoff, especially since you are already a normal weight.

    I know .5 lb seems slow, but as you get leaner there's more risk of losing more muscle as a percentage of loss, which is why focusing on body comp is a good idea.
  • AliceDark
    AliceDark Posts: 3,886 Member
    Options
    Be prepared for the fact that changing your rate of loss to 0.5 pounds per week may not get you a lot of extra calories to eat. Here's why: 1200 calories is MFP's floor for women. It won't give you a goal under 1200 calories, so that doesn't mean that 1200 calories will actually result in your chosen rate of loss. If it's giving you 1200 calories to lose 1.5 pounds, that also means that it will give you 1200 calories if you told it you wanted to lose 2 pounds per week. I suspect it would probably give you 1200 calories if you told it you wanted to lose 1 pound per week as well (although I'm not 100% sure of that).

    Try playing around with your numbers, and see what rate you have to enter to get a number other than 1200 calories. That will tell you when you've reached a more realistic goal and when MFP isn't just automatically spitting out 1200 calories because you've hit the floor.
  • TeaBea
    TeaBea Posts: 14,517 Member
    Options
    Choromyslny wrote: »
    I’m 5’3” female, 27 years old. Not overweight, just trying to lose a little bit. I work in retail so I’m on my feet a lot, but I set MFP to “active” to include all that. I don’t often do other exercises other than that, because it does take up a lot of my time and it’s basically kind of exercise by itself. If I do additional exercises I’ll record them and eat more to even out my net calories.

    5'3" is on the short side, but 27 years old is not elderly. Also consider retail is an active job. So yes, you should be eating more calories.

    You likely set your weekly weight loss goal too high. Set it to 1/2 pound a week (yes, that's excruciatingly slow)......but it's more realistic.

    Food choices can help here - protein, fiber & fat are satiating components. Test out different meal schedules too.
  • TeaBea
    TeaBea Posts: 14,517 Member
    Options
    marissafit06 wrote: »
    deannalfisher wrote: »
    5'3" and 123lbs is right in the middle of normal weight - you might want to consider recomping rather than losing weight (essentially gaining lean muscle mass and losing fat mass)

    I don’t understand why people on this forum love to say this. There is nothing wrong with wanting to be on the low end of a “normal” weight range. People have different builds and some also prefer to look lithe.

    OP - I agree with the previous advice that you should set your weight loss to .5 lbs a week and see how you feel with a few more calories to eat.

    Here's why people say this...........

    Recomping can be very slow weight loss, or weight maintenance. But it helps shape your results. Keeping lean muscle mass = a leaner look. The goal with recomping is not the number on the scale. Google before and after pictures with high body fat % vs. lower body fat %.

    Aggressive weight loss is often a higher % of lean muscle loss.....you don't shape the results.

    The same person can look thinner at a heavier weight.

    People do have different body types, but a number on the scale doesn't guarantee the results we sometimes think it does.
  • fb47
    fb47 Posts: 1,058 Member
    edited March 2018
    Options
    Choromyslny wrote: »
    So I’ve been sticking to MFP’s goal of 1,200 calories a day, but I’m so tired lately and sometimes I get a little dizzy and I in general just don’t feel well on this calorie allotment. Do I just need more time to get used to it? (Are we sure that amount is healthy?)

    If you're not short and sedentary, chances are you don't need to eat 1200 calories to lose weight. Only a minority of the population needs to eat 1200 calories for a good rate of weight loss....but yet it always surprises me how many women just pick that number, usually it's because they are desperate to lose weight asap, but they don't realize the damge they are doing to themselves or they didn't give good information on mfp when they set up their weight loss profile....Let's not forget many people chose also the 2lbs a week weight loss option when they don't need to. The 2lbs a week option is more for obese people who have a lot of weight to lose and I am talking about those who need to lose over 100 lbs, but yet I see many who only need to lose 10-15 lbs selecting that option which is ridiculous and very dangerous for someone's health and this without counting the fact that they are basically eating their muscles away.
  • Momepro
    Momepro Posts: 1,509 Member
    edited March 2018
    Options
    Most likely either that amount is actually a bit low for you personally at this time, or the foods you are choosing are just not the ones your body needs most right now. It is common when starting to work with CICO idea to cut out fats and carbs too much or too fast to be sustainable, or else eat very high calorie goodies but in small amounts, while neglecting some of the more nutritious options with staying power. Perhaps try adding 200 cal of healthy fats (nuts, avocado, cheese), for a few days and see what happens. Look back at your food log, and start writing how you feel before, during and an hour after each entry. After a few days, you can see a baseline of what foods and combos work best with your body and lifestyle.
  • Happysoul0317
    Happysoul0317 Posts: 119 Member
    Options
    I think it really depends on you. I can do 1200 calories, but I actually eat closer to 1700 and then burn off the 500 extra. Otherwise I get a little weak and shaky. I have to net 1200 to lose weight. I think that if you aren't working out and trying to only eat 1200 a day, it would be no bueno.
  • Bekah7482
    Bekah7482 Posts: 247 Member
    edited March 2018
    Options
    It could be a lot of factors. If you are feeling tired and dizzy. I would check your macros and the quality of food you are eating. I was feeling really fatigued and my dietitian upped my carbs without upping my calories and it worked. I was working out and not eating enough carbs. I also get dizzy from low blood pressure so I up my salt intake and am fine.

    You can also try upping your cals a little and see if that helps. If you are tired, dizzy and miserable, you are not setting yourself up for success. Try a few different things until you find what works for you.
  • marissafit06
    marissafit06 Posts: 1,996 Member
    Options
    TeaBea wrote: »
    marissafit06 wrote: »
    deannalfisher wrote: »
    5'3" and 123lbs is right in the middle of normal weight - you might want to consider recomping rather than losing weight (essentially gaining lean muscle mass and losing fat mass)

    I don’t understand why people on this forum love to say this. There is nothing wrong with wanting to be on the low end of a “normal” weight range. People have different builds and some also prefer to look lithe.

    OP - I agree with the previous advice that you should set your weight loss to .5 lbs a week and see how you feel with a few more calories to eat.

    Here's why people say this...........

    Recomping can be very slow weight loss, or weight maintenance. But it helps shape your results. Keeping lean muscle mass = a leaner look. The goal with recomping is not the number on the scale. Google before and after pictures with high body fat % vs. lower body fat %.

    Aggressive weight loss is often a higher % of lean muscle loss.....you don't shape the results.

    The same person can look thinner at a heavier weight.

    People do have different body types, but a number on the scale doesn't guarantee the results we sometimes think it does.

    I'm aware of all this and it was a rhetorical question. I think that sometimes people forget that there are people on these boards who have never been overweight, but went from quite thin to 10-15lbs heavier and sometimes want to get back to where they were.

Categories