Results on 1200 calories
Options
Replies
-
springlering62 wrote: »Everybody is different and I am a big advocate for doing what works for you. So if you are doing well on 1200kcal and it suits your outcomes and lifestyle then good on you.
I did 1200 kcals for a couple of weeks when I started with MyFitness Pal. It was WAY too low for me and the pain from hunger was too much. I worked out through experiment that 1800 kcals a day is good for an aggressive weight loss (2lb -3lbs a week), 2000kcal gives me a moderate weight loss (1-1.5 lbs a week) and 2500 - 2800 is maintenance. This resulted in a 100lbs loss in 11 months. (These numbers are just what suits my body and not for a second suggesting that this is what it should be for other people)
Honestly, one of the best things I did in my weight loss journey is work out what was good for my body, rather than take what MFP or the internet has to say. Yeah, it may have delayed things a bit more but it has set me up for success in the future.
After a horrendous year last year, I am just losing a bit of weight that I regained (30lbs). I have been doing between 1800 - 1900kcals and have lost 12.4lbs in 24 days. (before anyone comes at me there would have been a lot of water weight in the start!)
Good luck with your journey xx
This is one of the best posts I’ve seen in a while.
Weighing and logging accurately and consistently will give you data to make sure what you’re doing is appropriate for you.
I increased my calories three times while still continuing to lose. At one point I was maintaining at 3200 a day. At 60, I need to reel it in and have some recovery and down time. I’m studying my very useful cache of data to reevaluate how many calories I can enjoy at a slightly slower pace.
Don’t get locked in to the 1200 mindset. Remember that food is also nutrition and fuel for the wonderful cluster of cells that is your body. Listen to your body, and above all, listen to family and trusted friends. It’s possible to be chasing low calories or a low weight goal, drop too low and not recognize it in the mirror.
It’s also possible to smack that horse with the 1200-calorie whip to the finish line, congratulate yourself and let go, finding yourself back to Square One.
This has to be something you and I can continue forever, and that requires good habits well into maintenance.
100% endorse both those posts. I'd underscore this part of it: What matters is not so much the calorie level, but the actual weight loss rate and the subjective experience.
MFP, a fitness tracker, or a TDEE calculator can be used to provide a starting point, but after 4-6 weeks on a new regimen (whole menstrual cycles if that applies), a person has enough personal experience to stop relying on population averages from those tools, and start exploiting his/her own personal experiential weight loss data.
I'd repeat myself from earlier: The various calculators (and my fitness tracker) thought I needed to eat 1200 calories to lose at a sensible rate, when I gave them accurate descriptions of myself. It was not hard to eat 1200 (plus exercise calories), I was not hungry, I didn't feel deprived - none of that. It was very doable, in that sense. But I lost so fast at the calculated calories that it had negative health consequences very suddenly. (It was fortunately only mild consequences!)
Pay attention to your actual loss rate, once you have enough experience data. Even before that, watch out for hints of negative symptoms (weakness, fatigue, etc.) alongside what looks like could be faster loss based on limited data.
Whatever calorie level gives you a sensibly moderate, sustainable loss rate, and keeps you energetic, strong, and healthy - that's a good calorie level, be it 1200 or 3000+.2 -
I love the comments about how 1200 calories can be different for different people. As a vegetarian, 1200 calories can be a LOT of food for me, so I never really had to "manage" hunger. If I chose 1200 calories of peanut butter and ice cream, I can see where there might be some issues. 😁9
-
I do have to manage hunger and it is very tricky, but only because we are different people. That said, we are in complete agreement. I had to stop eating cheese, nuts and a slew of other delectables in order to minimise both hunger and food-related stress. The result is that nobody wants to eat what I make, although it is palatable-enough for myself. I am no vegetarian and never intended to become one, but if I removed sardines from my diet, I would actually be a vegan. Not by intention, but simply by following the "path of least hunger" for me.I love the comments about how 1200 calories can be different for different people. As a vegetarian, 1200 calories can be a LOT of food for me, so I never really had to "manage" hunger. If I chose 1200 calories of peanut butter and ice cream, I can see where there might be some issues. 😁2 -
LiveOnceBeHappy wrote: »I did 1200 calories for about 9 months while I lost 50 lbs. I didn't adjust for my very little exercise (walking). It worked well for me. There were occasional splurges, but I was pretty consistent in weighing my food and tracking every bite. I've slacked off now and have gained 5 lbs back, but I'm still okay. I did not develop an eating disorder! I am healthy! 53, female. 173 lbs to 125 lbs (this am). 5' 2.5".
that sounds good for you - and you meet the criteria of people for whom 1200 can be appropriate - female, older, shorter, not very active.
The pushback usually comes when somebody 30 years younger, 6 inches taller, and higher activity level plans to do same calorie level as you.
4 -
I love the comments about how 1200 calories can be different for different people. As a vegetarian, 1200 calories can be a LOT of food for me, so I never really had to "manage" hunger. If I chose 1200 calories of peanut butter and ice cream, I can see where there might be some issues. 😁
Speaking as someone who's also vegetarian, I don't think that's the whole story. I think some people are more subject to hunger on any given mix of food than others.
I also suspect the number of calories a person needs to maintain also makes a difference in how hungry they get even on a perfect-for-them mix of foods at a given calorie amount, i.e. I'd speculate that someone who needs 3000 to maintain may well be more hungry at 1200 than would be someone who needs 1500 to maintain. Calorie needs aren't purely a matter of size and age, either, or entirely those plus current activity level - it seems like there are some mystery factors that lead some relatively rare few of us to be significant outliers when it comes to calorie estimates from MFP (or TDEE calculator, or fitness trackers).
Like you, I didn't have trouble appetite-wise at 1200, even though it was too low for me (as measured by loss rate and eventual health consequences). In my case, I don't really attribute that lack of appetite struggle to being vegetarian (I became obese as a vegetarian after all, and not entirely on non-sating foods). I attribute it more but to simply being lucky to be a person not inclined to (or sensitive to?) major hunger sensations. Even when I've been underfueled in my subjective opinion - like on some long days on vacation paddling a canoe and portaging for hours with minimal intake - the need is more likely to manifest as brain fog or fatigue, rather than hunger sensations.
There's a lot of variation in people's reported subjective experience with hunger, appetite, and cravings, and I don't disbelieve their reports just because they're unlike mine, or because I think my way of eating is necessarily objectively and universally more filling (though I do suspect most people will find whole foods more filling, generally).
On top of that, it seems that mindset about one's food matters physiologically, bizarrely enough.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21574706/
That has some interesting implications, potentially.
But we digress from OP's question.2 -
Digress? Who? Us?4
-
@AnnPT77 & @springlering62 hey I'm not sure if you guys remember RaquelFit2 but that was my old user name. I got frustrated with lack of movement in the scale and decided to take a MFP break. I gained about 8 pounds so now I'm back to square one.
I definitely need more that 1200 calories in order to stay healthy.3 -
@AnnPT77 & @springlering62 hey I'm not sure if you guys remember RaquelFit2 but that was my old user name. I got frustrated with lack of movement in the scale and decided to take a MFP break. I gained about 8 pounds so now I'm back to square one.
I definitely need more that 1200 calories in order to stay healthy.
I do remember you! Much success to you this time around. I’m sure you will be!
If it’s any comfort, I’m about eight pounds above where I’d like to be, so I don’t mean to come off like a complete smart *kitten*, lol.
This whole weight loss thing is very cyclical, but we have the tools in the palm of our hand- and our fridge and our pantry!- to be successful.
I just worry about newbs coming and glomming on to the “1200 a day” thing because that’s an arbitrary number that’s been bandied about for years, and it’s just not true. I hope the takeaway from this thread is, do your research and do what’s right for you!5 -
@springlering62 Hugs! Thank you.
When you come on to the site and it defaults you to "1200 calories" it's easy to think this is how much I should eat. I just know from experience it's not happening.0 -
paperpudding wrote: »LiveOnceBeHappy wrote: »I did 1200 calories for about 9 months while I lost 50 lbs. I didn't adjust for my very little exercise (walking). It worked well for me. There were occasional splurges, but I was pretty consistent in weighing my food and tracking every bite. I've slacked off now and have gained 5 lbs back, but I'm still okay. I did not develop an eating disorder! I am healthy! 53, female. 173 lbs to 125 lbs (this am). 5' 2.5".
that sounds good for you - and you meet the criteria of people for whom 1200 can be appropriate - female, older, shorter, not very active.
The pushback usually comes when somebody 30 years younger, 6 inches taller, and higher activity level plans to do same calorie level as you.
But if I were 6" taller and had a higher activity level, then the calculator also wouldn't have given me 1200 calories either! I did the calculator at my previous weight, moderate exercise, and 6" taller. I would have been barely overweight and have been given 1600 calories per day to lose 1 pound a week.
I think the calculator works. It gave me 1200, and that's what I did. So I find it weird that people provide cautionary tales of failure when the calculator gives the person 1200 calories.2 -
LiveOnceBeHappy wrote: »paperpudding wrote: »LiveOnceBeHappy wrote: »I did 1200 calories for about 9 months while I lost 50 lbs. I didn't adjust for my very little exercise (walking). It worked well for me. There were occasional splurges, but I was pretty consistent in weighing my food and tracking every bite. I've slacked off now and have gained 5 lbs back, but I'm still okay. I did not develop an eating disorder! I am healthy! 53, female. 173 lbs to 125 lbs (this am). 5' 2.5".
that sounds good for you - and you meet the criteria of people for whom 1200 can be appropriate - female, older, shorter, not very active.
The pushback usually comes when somebody 30 years younger, 6 inches taller, and higher activity level plans to do same calorie level as you.
But if I were 6" taller and had a higher activity level, then the calculator also wouldn't have given me 1200 calories either! I did the calculator at my previous weight, moderate exercise, and 6" taller. I would have been barely overweight and have been given 1600 calories per day to lose 1 pound a week.
I think the calculator works. It gave me 1200, and that's what I did. So I find it weird that people provide cautionary tales of failure when the calculator gives the person 1200 calories.
It was off by around 500 or so calories daily (maintenance number) for me, so the weight loss goal was also too aggressively low.
The so called calculator spits out a number that's essentially the average for similar people. Most people are close to average. A few are a bit off, high or low. A rare few are surprisingly far off.
That's the nature of statistical estimates. There's a bell curve, in this case a pretty tall narrow one (small-ish standard deviation). Most people are near the middle of the bell. Further out from the middle (higher or lower calorie needs, in this case), there are fewer people.
The calculator is a good starting point, because most people are close to average. That's how to place a bet: Go with the odds to start, adjust when you have enough experience data.
On top of that, some people set up MFP asking for a 2 pound a week weight loss rate when that's too aggressive in their case, or say they're less active than they really are, or otherwise give data that leads to an aggressively low, potentially risky goal.
3 -
LiveOnceBeHappy wrote: »
I think the calculator works. It gave me 1200, and that's what I did. So I find it weird that people provide cautionary tales of failure when the calculator gives the person 1200 calories.
I think that the cautionary tales are just saying that the calculator won't be suitable for everyone but probably most. It is about starting somewhere and the calculator is a great tool to get you to the start line.
It is then about working out what is right for you. That will only be known through the personal experience of tracking weight loss and kcals.
The only thing I would caution about is if you are on a diet of ANY kcals (whether that is 1200kcals or higher) and you are losing more than 2lbs a week regularly and having adverse health implications such as fatigue, lightheadedness, hair loss, loss of period (if that applies to you), excessive thirst. Please up your calories as you are damaging your body and putting yourself in danger.
For me, those symptoms kicked in at 1500 kcals but for others it may never happen even at 800 kcal diet.
As you can see from the screenshot below. The calculator would have put me at 1240kcals which is a dangerous kcal output for me. However, I am not an average person as I have one fake breast due to reconstruction and carry a lot of muscle as I am a powerlifter. So my metabolism is higher than most and my weight is not totally reflective of my body fat due to 9lbs of fake breast I carry. Even when I was a UK size 8, I was classified as overweight in BMI.
It is about knowing yourself and appreciating yourself and your body well enough to treat it well.6 -
LiveOnceBeHappy wrote: »
I think the calculator works. It gave me 1200, and that's what I did. So I find it weird that people provide cautionary tales of failure when the calculator gives the person 1200 calories.
I think that the cautionary tales are just saying that the calculator won't be suitable for everyone but probably most. It is about starting somewhere and the calculator is a great tool to get you to the start line.
It is about knowing yourself and appreciating yourself and your body well enough to treat it well.
True! Plus, if you're not feeling well on the 1200 limit you might just give up. Picking calories and weight needs to be sustainable and realistic. I'd like to be 125 pounds but it's not realistic or sustainable so I made a different goal.
Being healthy should always be the overall goal.
0 -
LiveOnceBeHappy wrote: »
I think the calculator works. It gave me 1200, and that's what I did. So I find it weird that people provide cautionary tales of failure when the calculator gives the person 1200 calories.
I think that the cautionary tales are just saying that the calculator won't be suitable for everyone but probably most. It is about starting somewhere and the calculator is a great tool to get you to the start line.
It is then about working out what is right for you. That will only be known through the personal experience of tracking weight loss and kcals.
The only thing I would caution about is if you are on a diet of ANY kcals (whether that is 1200kcals or higher) and you are losing more than 2lbs a week regularly and having adverse health implications such as fatigue, lightheadedness, hair loss, loss of period (if that applies to you), excessive thirst. Please up your calories as you are damaging your body and putting yourself in danger.
For me, those symptoms kicked in at 1500 kcals but for others it may never happen even at 800 kcal diet.
As you can see from the screenshot below. The calculator would have put me at 1240kcals which is a dangerous kcal output for me. However, I am not an average person as I have one fake breast due to reconstruction and carry a lot of muscle as I am a powerlifter. So my metabolism is higher than most and my weight is not totally reflective of my body fat due to 9lbs of fake breast I carry. Even when I was a UK size 8, I was classified as overweight in BMI.
It is about knowing yourself and appreciating yourself and your body well enough to treat it well.
QFT. I'd even strengthen the bolded a bit: If a person experiences those symptoms at any weight loss rate, even one lower than 2+ pounds a week (with no other probable explanation), I'd suggest eating a bit more (slowing down).
Those symptoms, and maybe a few others like sleep disturbance, can be the canary in the coal mine. Worse can be coming, if one tries to power through with "willpower". (Are bad things guaranteed to happen? No. But it's a red flag.)
Calorie deficit (weight loss) is a stress on the body, even though we hope for long term positive results from doing it. It can be cumulative with other sources of life stress, both physical and psychological. Some common examples of stressors are too-intense exercise for current fitness level, high-pressure job, daily difficulties in family relationships, poor quality/quantity of sleep, sub-ideal nutrition, pre-existing health conditions, and more. Too-high total stress can have physical side effects.
From observing friends, I also think some people can be more (or less) inclined to experience stress under the same set of circumstances, or to be less physically resilient to stress when it does happen. I don't intend a "blame the victim" stance there, because I don't think we necessarily have full explicit control over either our stress-reactiveness or our resilience to stress.
We come to our current stage in life with different personalities, outlooks, cultural assumptions, some genetic tendencies, physical robustness, etc. pre-installed as a product of everything from family genetics to the totality of our life experience. We may be able to work on changing some of our pre-installed circuitry to some extent. Improving fitness, getting to body weight, seeking out counseling/support, and getting better nutrition is part of that, right?
But our current state is where we are now for how we experience stress, and how resilient we are in the face of it.
It would be nice if there were an instant switch to flip by someone saying "be less stressed" or "be more resilient" but it doesn't work that way, IME.1 -
As a not so tall, not so young person I would have been deeply unhappy about only eating 1200 calories as it meant not eating the things I enjoy. My golden spot is about 1400 plus exercise. Which might just be a bit of walking and strength training (I might add 100-150) or a 3-10km run. Basically, I just like a desert every day and some candy. That's a must. Plus my food tends to contain lots of spices and herbs, which in the amounts I use them quickly add up. Imagine 1200 calories, and 100-150 are for spices and a self-made sauce. Doesn't fill up at all, but is oh so delicious. Oh, and fat means flavour. I'd never bake a fish filet in a sprinkle of oil. Restricting too much is just not working for me.
Signed: someone who loves their flavours
8 -
(snip)people set up MFP asking for a 2 pound a week weight loss rate when that's too aggressive in their case, or say they're less active than they really are, or otherwise give data that leads to an aggressively low, potentially risky goal.LiveOnceBeHappy wrote: »But if I were 6" taller and had a higher activity level, then the calculator also wouldn't have given me 1200 calories either! (snip) So I find it weird that people provide cautionary tales of failure when the calculator gives the person 1200 calories.
QFT ... plus yes, sufficient quantities of spices CAN add up. even if so many of them list their values at 0 Cal... per 0.25 gram... and then you find USDA or European values and discover they are 199Cal per 100g, just under the "randomly selected" cut-off to report as zero! 2 -
LiveOnceBeHappy wrote: »paperpudding wrote: »LiveOnceBeHappy wrote: »I did 1200 calories for about 9 months while I lost 50 lbs. I didn't adjust for my very little exercise (walking). It worked well for me. There were occasional splurges, but I was pretty consistent in weighing my food and tracking every bite. I've slacked off now and have gained 5 lbs back, but I'm still okay. I did not develop an eating disorder! I am healthy! 53, female. 173 lbs to 125 lbs (this am). 5' 2.5".
that sounds good for you - and you meet the criteria of people for whom 1200 can be appropriate - female, older, shorter, not very active.
The pushback usually comes when somebody 30 years younger, 6 inches taller, and higher activity level plans to do same calorie level as you.
But if I were 6" taller and had a higher activity level, then the calculator also wouldn't have given me 1200 calories either! I did the calculator at my previous weight, moderate exercise, and 6" taller. I would have been barely overweight and have been given 1600 calories per day to lose 1 pound a week.
I think the calculator works. It gave me 1200, and that's what I did. So I find it weird that people provide cautionary tales of failure when the calculator gives the person 1200 calories.
yes I realise that.
If the calculator is used correctly - ie some people select 2lb per week when 2lb is too aggressive for the amount they have to lose.
and some people just go for 1200 calories, getting that number from somewhere random (ie not individualised) without using MFP calculator at all
and some people don't realise 1200 (or any MFP generated number) is that amount Net - and do a lot of excercise and dont eat any calories back
and some people, like somebody earlier in the thread, think they should aim for under the 1200 they were given.
so like I said before, 1200 is suitable for some people- if calculated correctly and followed correctly
3 -
Hey! I wanted to hear positive stories from those that have lost weight following a 1200kcal diet. I find it strange how everyone sees it as dangerous or the cause of eating disorders. And I can google that if I need to - so only positive stories please
it’s working well for me so far so I just wanted to find some similar people! I have 50lb to lose altogether ❤️
The thread is abut positive stories about 1200 calories. So I'm skipping all the negative stories.
Long live the 1200, positive stories thread 2 -
Hey! I wanted to hear positive stories from those that have lost weight following a 1200kcal diet. I find it strange how everyone sees it as dangerous or the cause of eating disorders. And I can google that if I need to - so only positive stories please it’s working well for me so far so I just wanted to find some similar people! I have 50lb to lose altogether ❤️
The thread is abut positive stories about 1200 calories. So I'm skipping all the negative stories.
Long live the 1200, positive stories thread
I am positive that 1200 calories isn't the right answer for everyone. For some, yes.
Positive.9 -
Hey! I wanted to hear positive stories from those that have lost weight following a 1200kcal diet. I find it strange how everyone sees it as dangerous or the cause of eating disorders. And I can google that if I need to - so only positive stories please it’s working well for me so far so I just wanted to find some similar people! I have 50lb to lose altogether ❤️
The thread is abut positive stories about 1200 calories. So I'm skipping all the negative stories.
Long live the 1200, positive stories thread
I am positive that 1200 calories isn't the right answer for everyone. For some, yes.
Positive.
the 1200 calories people are not saying it is. Are they? They are just trying to motivate those, for who it is.3
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 390 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 922 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions