1200

Options
2»

Replies

  • agthorn
    agthorn Posts: 1,844 Member
    Options
    If I'm correct it's not even calories that put your body into ketosis it's lack of carbs. I honestly believe the whole 1200 cals is crap. My BMR is 1290!! So I can't even get a 500 deficit without going below 1200.

    Just sayin

    But that's why losing weight can't just be accomplished through diet! My BMR is 1800. I need to create a calorie deficit of 900 calories per day if i want to hit my goal of 2 lbs of weight loss a week. So, I make sure to eat 1200 calories (that is an automatic deficit of 600) and burn AT LEAST 300 through exercise (and don't eat those cals back). Done, a 900 calorie deficit. If your BMR really is that low (which seems odd, so you may want to double check) then consult a dietician on how to proceed. People can argue this all they want but the fact is that science doesn't lie. Everyone is different, of course. That's why these are guidelines, not gospel.

    Both of you are wrong, because you're using your BMR as your starting point instead of your maintenance level of calories. Your BMR is the number of calories needed to sustain your bodily functions - breathing, digestion, heartbeat, etc. It does not account for any movement. It would be your caloric need if you were in a coma.

    For sedentary people (desk jobs), the multiplier is 1.25...so you have to take your BMR and multiply it by 1.25 to get the calorie level needed to maintain your current weight. If your BMR is 1290, then your maintenance level is about 1612. If your BMR is 1800, your maintenance level is 2250. THEN you create a deficit to lose weight. For 2 pounds a week, your deficit would be 1000 calories or a NET of 1250 a day. If your maintenance is 1612, then it's clear that trying to lose 2 lbs a week would be far too unhealthy because it would require a NET of only 612 calories. This person would do much better aiming for 1/2-3/4 of a pound per week.

    You're right, science doesn't lie. The problem is that I'd estimate over half the people on this site don't understand the science.
  • shakybabe
    shakybabe Posts: 1,578 Member
    Options
    That's a great explanation its first time I've understood it properly. I didn't relaise your BMR changes though after you lost weight..

    I thought 1200 sounded low when other sites were suggesting 1691 or something but someone said this site works out the deficit for you so I guessed it had taken 500 away, even if i choose lightly active though I'm still in 1200 range on this site.. whereas on other sites they seemed to be quite a big difference between the numbers if you chose sedentary or lightly active... so it confused me!


    Also now I've gone gluten free and low carb I find I'm struggling to get to 1200 unless I add chocolate, crisps, brandy and coke, which then kind of defeats the object of eating healthily!

    I can't snack on nuts either as healthy high cal snack as I'm severely allergic to them. If I only make it just past 1,000 one day I try and do more the next day by having sweet potato or jacket potato or something or something like 2 large eggs on gluten free toast for breakfast, as the gluten free bread tends to be higher cal than regular bread.

    Edit: I just checked on here and my BMR is now 1,371 so around 1200 might be about right for me now!
  • daisymae9801
    daisymae9801 Posts: 208 Member
    Options
    If I'm correct it's not even calories that put your body into ketosis it's lack of carbs. I honestly believe the whole 1200 cals is crap. My BMR is 1290!! So I can't even get a 500 deficit without going below 1200.

    Just sayin

    Just wanted to say that ketosis is not starvation mode.
  • Onesnap
    Onesnap Posts: 2,819 Member
    Options
    Here's my post from May about "Why 1,200?"


    Check it out....


    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/244664-why-1-200-calories-per-day
  • Silvergamma
    Silvergamma Posts: 102 Member
    Options
    [...]

    You're right, science doesn't lie. The problem is that I'd estimate over half the people on this site don't understand the science.

    Exactly. There is a blanket mentality to set goal weight loss to 2lb/week whether that's reasonable or not, and to eat at calorie deficits below BMR. Those are my two biggest issues with this site.
  • agthorn
    agthorn Posts: 1,844 Member
    Options
    I thought 1200 sounded low when other sites were suggesting 1691 or something but someone said this site works out the deficit for you so I guessed it had taken 500 away

    YES. When MPF gives you a calorie goal it has already factored in a calorie deficit according to your weight loss goal (though the site is programmed to not let you go below 1200 calories net per day). It will tell you your net goal WITHOUT ANY EXERCISE. Meaning that someone can put in a goal and achieve it without any exercise if they are meeting their net calorie goal. It does not factor in exercise calories until the exercise is already completed, which is why the mantra of "eat your exercise calories" is everywhere on this site. Otherwise you will be making your deficit even larger, possibly even too large to be healthy, and certainly not fueling your body properly for the level of activity it is doing.
  • agthorn
    agthorn Posts: 1,844 Member
    Options
    [...]

    You're right, science doesn't lie. The problem is that I'd estimate over half the people on this site don't understand the science.

    Exactly. There is a blanket mentality to set goal weight loss to 2lb/week whether that's reasonable or not, and to eat at calorie deficits below BMR. Those are my two biggest issues with this site.

    YES YES YES. A third would be the people who say "Why would I eat my exercise calories back? I want to lose weight, not maintain."

    Many, many people have their weight loss goals set far too high. I have been contemplating a "MFP tutorial" post.
  • shakybabe
    shakybabe Posts: 1,578 Member
    Options
    I thought 1200 sounded low when other sites were suggesting 1691 or something but someone said this site works out the deficit for you so I guessed it had taken 500 away

    YES. When MPF gives you a calorie goal it has already factored in a calorie deficit according to your weight loss goal (though the site is programmed to not let you go below 1200 calories net per day). It will tell you your net goal WITHOUT ANY EXERCISE. Meaning that someone can put in a goal and achieve it without any exercise if they are meeting their net calorie goal. It does not factor in exercise calories until the exercise is already completed, which is why the mantra of "eat your exercise calories" is everywhere on this site. Otherwise you will be making your deficit even larger, possibly even too large to be healthy, and certainly not fueling your body properly for the level of activity it is doing.

    ok... I did find it confusing when all numbers changed after I added exercise so stopped doing it.. as some people were saying they didn't eat back their exercise calories anyway. I'm injured this week so won't manage any workouts.. so for this week I'm just trying to get to 1200 cals as finding it difficult with low carb diet.
  • amyylouise3114
    amyylouise3114 Posts: 3
    Options
    Hiya

    Okay, so this might be a totally blonde question here.. My daily Calorific intake is between 1200 and 1400.... My BMR is 1450 according to this sites estimations... is this good or bad?? I'm so confused right now.

    Oh and whats a deficit.. A calorie deficit I think it was... I can't remember , yet I was only reading it two seconds ago aha.

    Basically, someone needs to explain ALL of this to me.

    Thanks :)
  • JessicaModel
    JessicaModel Posts: 3
    Options
    I usually aim to eat around 1,000 calories a day. Which is less than 1,200 - I guess. But I like to bump it up and change it every now and then - Recently (Unintentionally) I have found myself eating far little - 600 or so calories. Which is quite awful really - I wasn't counting them correctly so estimated I was eating more. If you eat that little - then you will gain the weight back (Up to two stone) by eating unhealthily just for say, a week. So i'm trying to find some healthy foods I can snack on to fulfill my daily intake. It really depends on how much that you weigh - If you are quite overweight you could eat between 1,200 and 1,400 and would probably lose quite alot. But if you're already quite slim (Like me) - It's seriously hard to lose any weight whatsoever. So I would recommend eating between 1,000 - 1,200 - A little less. If you exercise the pounds should drop off in no time! XOXO
  • ashleigh2311
    ashleigh2311 Posts: 105 Member
    Options
    anorexics can be 90 lbs because they literally do not eat. but when they do decide to eat, they often gain weight at an incredibly rapid pace because their body has been deprived for so long. that's what starvation mode is. your body gets deprived for long enough that when it does finally get those nutrients, it holds on to them and stores them to survive

    definitely not true.

    I had anorexia for a number of years and even when i was forced into inpatient care and went from <300 cals a day to over 3000 cals a day it still took me months of being force fed to gain back even a bit of the weight i had lost.

Categories