1200 calories: How does that work?

Options
svel713
svel713 Posts: 141 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
You can't get calories exact, but you can't go below 1200. So do you have days where its like 1151 for one, then 1245 the next? Do you do 1200-1299?

I feel like its a stupid question but I was wondering about it today.
«1

Replies

  • jelleigh
    jelleigh Posts: 743 Member
    Options
    I use my weekly totals instead of daily ones. So as long as my week hits the targets, then thats good. Then if I have a high day here or there and a low day here or there, it all evens out.
  • Lounmoun
    Lounmoun Posts: 8,426 Member
    Options
    svel713 wrote: »
    You can't get calories exact, but you can't go below 1200. So do you have days where its like 1151 for one, then 1245 the next? Do you do 1200-1299?

    I feel like its a stupid question but I was wondering about it today.

    Is your question about completing the diary for the day if you are under your goal? You do not have to click the complete diary button. It doesn't really do anything.

    If my calorie goal was 1200 I would prelog my food for the day until I got as close to 1200 as I could. I would not stress if I was 10-50 calories under. If I exercised I would log it and eat more than 1200. I make an effort not to have my calorie goal be 1200 though.

    You could look at weekly calorie intake and make sure things average out.
  • emmamcgarity
    emmamcgarity Posts: 1,594 Member
    Options
    I focus mainly on the weekly net calorie stats. Most days I am within 10-15% of the daily goal. I don’t worry about hitting it exactly.
  • apullum
    apullum Posts: 4,838 Member
    Options
    One day of eating 1100 calories is not going to hurt you. Consistently eating 1100 calories means you might not get the energy and nutrients your body needs. If you’re hitting your calorie goal on average for the week, then it’s fine to be a little under one day and a little over the next.
  • motivatedmartha
    motivatedmartha Posts: 1,108 Member
    Options
    Works fine for me - I don't sweat plus or minus up to 50 each day (You are allowed to ignore the red on your tracker 😉) and I eat back around 50% of the calories I earn through activity.
  • ColorMe_Beautiful24
    ColorMe_Beautiful24 Posts: 67 Member
    Options
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    It doesn't really matter, if you're varying just by a few. All of our intake and exercise are estimates anyway, and our bodies don't have a clock that clicks over at midnight to figure out how much you ate one day vs. the next.

    YOU made a very valid point about out body not being able to differentiate that time change. I will keep that in mind next time i'm obsessing over what to eat
  • jennifer_417
    jennifer_417 Posts: 12,344 Member
    Options
    50 calories really isn't going to make a difference. It isn't like there's some big red line between 1199 and 1200 that is healthy on one side and malnourished on the other.
  • SamskiB
    SamskiB Posts: 211 Member
    Options
    The past few days i know ive been eating under 1200 (mainly because ive been drinking more liquids due to the heat and i haven't felt hungry as such) but today i'm very hungry so i think i'll go over the 1200.
    I have the 1200 cal goal no matter what i put in to lose weekly, but im not too fussed if i go up to 1300 on a day. I'm not that obsessed with the 1200 number!
  • fb47
    fb47 Posts: 1,058 Member
    edited July 2018
    Options
    pinksunnyrose wrote: »
    My bmr is 1186 at 5”3 so I have been eating around that much to lose weight the past 6-7 months.

    Side note: Sly Stallone ate around 1100 cals to lose weight back in his prime.

    Not sure how true your statement on Stallone, but that is stupid and dangerous if he did that. No men should eat under 1500 calories and I doubt a guy as active as Stallone would ever need to eat that low. If Stallone ate that low, no men and women should strive to reach that calorie number as a goal just because Stallone did it.

    The only way I can see Stallone doing it is if the movie studio asked him to lose a ridiculous amount of weight in a short period of time. But at the same time, it would eat his muscles even if he would be on steroids which is the selling point for any movie he makes. It would make no sense.
  • WinoGelato
    WinoGelato Posts: 13,454 Member
    Options
    Samib86 wrote: »
    The past few days i know ive been eating under 1200 (mainly because ive been drinking more liquids due to the heat and i haven't felt hungry as such) but today i'm very hungry so i think i'll go over the 1200.
    I have the 1200 cal goal no matter what i put in to lose weekly, but im not too fussed if i go up to 1300 on a day. I'm not that obsessed with the 1200 number!

    The fact that you get the same calorie target no matter what you enter for a rate of loss goal suggests that you are probably petite, already close to or at a healthy weight, and selecting Sedentary for your activity level.

    If you have less than 20 lbs to lose you should be aiming for a rate of 0.5 lb/week, and also. Insider if you really need to lose weight or ifa body recoup might be more appropriate for achieving your goals.
  • ThereAreManyNames
    ThereAreManyNames Posts: 54 Member
    edited July 2018
    Options
    https://www.menshealth.com/nutrition/a19543462/sylvester-stallone-rocky-diet/

    He admits it was stupid but there have been days I haven't eaten up to 1200 simply because I didn't feel like it, on days where I'm just eating veggies and chicken breast it seems unnecessary. It's not sustainable in the long term but people can also go without eating at all a couple days with no ill effects and no one would prescribe that as a diet. But the body is pretty adaptable and 1200 isn't some magic number where you instantly become sick if you happen to dip one calorie below it.
  • fb47
    fb47 Posts: 1,058 Member
    Options
    ThereAreManyNames wrote: »
    https://www.menshealth.com/nutrition/a19543462/sylvester-stallone-rocky-diet/

    He admits it was stupid but there have been days I haven't eaten 1200 simply because I didn't feel like it. It's not sustainable in the long term but people can also go without eating at all a couple days with no ill effects and no one would prescribe that as a diet. But the body is pretty adaptable and 1200 isn't some magic number where you instantly become sick if you happen to dip one calorie below it.

    Well for a man, it's 400 calories less than the minimum required....so yes it is dangerous for a man to eat at 1100 calories.

Categories