1200 calories: How does that work?
svel713
Posts: 141 Member
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.
I feel like its a stupid question but I was wondering about it today.
0
Replies
-
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.
It can be dangerous (unhealthy) to undereat all the time (that's why the 1200 warning exists), but a little above or below doesn't matter that much. What matters is the overall pattern you set: If you eat fewer calories than you burn, on average, over quite a long period of time, you will lose weight.
Just get close to your goal most days, and you'll be fine. But don't try to lose more than about 1% of your body weight per week (that's undereating) and more slowly is even better if you have only 25 or so pounds left to lose to your final goal weight. And, if you let MFP calculate your calorie goal, eat back at least some of your exercise calories (most people start with 50%). Monitor your results over 4-6 weeks, then adjust your calorie goal based on actual results.
Best wishes!9 -
A better question is, is 1200 cals necessary?
The answer is often no!17 -
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.1
-
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.
1151 for one, then 1245 is fine if 1200 is actually an appropriate calorie goal for you. Unless you are very very short and practically bedridden, it's lower than you need to go.
https://www.aworkoutroutine.com/1200-calorie-diet/12 -
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.2 -
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.2
-
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.0
-
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.1
-
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 eat2 -
A small percentage of people need 1200 calories to lose weight at a reasonable rate, unfortunately I see it way too often on mfp. It's like people love making themselves suffer. Before going 1200 calories, I would question if you made the right choice.5
-
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.2
-
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!4 -
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.18 -
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.4 -
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.3 -
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.2 -
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.
BMR is the amount of calories you would need to sustain bodily functions if you were in a coma. Aiming for that as your calorie target likely means you are under fueling your body and any activity/exercise you do.
Most people, even petite females, don't need to go as low as 1200 to lose. I’m 5’2 and lost most of my weight eating between 1600-1900 cals.12 -
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.2 -
If i eat more than 1200 I don't lose weight9
-
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.
Matthew McConaughey lost @ 40 pounds in a few months for Dallas Buyers Club. So what? It's his job. The vast majority of the population doesn't get paid millions to lose weight.5 -
-
I finished reading the article on Sly Stallone, even he said it was stupid and dangerous, so I don't understand why you had to say "Side note: Sly Stallone ate around 1100 cals to lose weight back in his prime." like it's nothing. He himself said it was dangerous to the point that he "would get so lightheaded and exhausted while filming boxing rounds that he’d go to a corner and literally do a handstand to get blood flowing back into his head." (quote from the article).ThereAreManyNames wrote: »
6 -
WinoGelato wrote: »
Some days are more accurate than others but on average I don't go over that. The problem is I'm really short and don't have that much to lose which is why 1200 is necessary for me. I don't find it difficult tho as luckily i don't have a big appetite9 -
Sometimes if I go over I'll log on another day so that I technically under eat the following to make-up for over eating. If it's only like 20-60 calories, it really doesn't matter. You are burning cals throughout the day doing simple things like walking and standing.0
-
WinoGelato wrote: »
Some days are more accurate than others but on average I don't go over that. The problem is I'm really short and don't have that much to lose which is why 1200 is necessary for me. I don't find it difficult tho as luckily i don't have a big appetite
How short? How much weight are you trying to lose? If less than 20 lbs, you can expect a rate of loss of 0.5 lb/week which can easily be masked by water weight and fluctuations, making it seem like you aren’t losing if over 1200 cals.6 -
I finished reading the article on Sly Stallone, even he said it was stupid and dangerous, so I don't understand why you had to say "Side note: Sly Stallone ate around 1100 cals to lose weight back in his prime." like it's nothing. He himself said it was dangerous to the point that he "would get so lightheaded and exhausted while filming boxing rounds that he’d go to a corner and literally do a handstand to get blood flowing back into his head." (quote from the article).ThereAreManyNames wrote: »
I assume you didn't mean to quote me, as I'm not the one who said that.0 -
ThereAreManyNames wrote: »
I finished reading the article on Sly Stallone, even he said it was stupid and dangerous, so I don't understand why you had to say "Side note: Sly Stallone ate around 1100 cals to lose weight back in his prime." like it's nothing. He himself said it was dangerous to the point that he "would get so lightheaded and exhausted while filming boxing rounds that he’d go to a corner and literally do a handstand to get blood flowing back into his head." (quote from the article).ThereAreManyNames wrote: »
I assume you didn't mean to quote me, as I'm not the one who said that.
You're right, it was pinkyrose something. My message still stands, but not at you, more towards the person (pinkyrose) who mentioned Sly Stallone's 1100 calories diet.3 -
I'm 5'2" on the dot, 101lbs average daily, about 14-15% bodyfat.
1200 is a very important number for me... xD; My TDEE is only just over 1400. Honestly, I do still track what I eat, just very loosely. No weighing - my guesstimating is pretty spot on. So far, I've maintained my weight for a year. I do change my guesstimates day-to-day based on if I lost or gained a few pounds (never more than 4), change my diet if I'm getting super bloated, etc.
Note; Yes, my doc okay'd this weight for me. I have an extremely small frame of 28"-23"-30".4 -
Doing 1200 calories for over a year did some damage to my metabolism. Took me months for my body to recover. Now 2000 is my maintenance and 1600 is my deficit2
-
WinoGelato wrote: »
Yeah - I was thinking this. That VAST majority of women can eat more than 1200 and lose weight. Maybe not as fast as we like, maybe not when eye-balling portions, but it can be done.4
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions