Seriously ... 1200 calories or less

Options
1…1011121416

Replies

  • kryptonitekelly
    kryptonitekelly Posts: 335 Member
    Options
    It was a guy too! Which in my opinion is a lot worse as they need more cals than woman do .
  • akiramezu
    akiramezu Posts: 278
    Options
    I just saw someone with700 calories each day, and burning a considerable amount of it with people sayin WTG, Well done...etc. Are they serious?

    people be crazyyyyyyyyyyyyy
  • sexyminxinthemaking
    sexyminxinthemaking Posts: 451 Member
    Options
    this dosent work for everybody :grumble: im 5ft 3 and have a very small frame and if i was to eat more than 1200 cals a day my body gains weight. if it works for you then great but be aware your preaching wont work for everyone :explode:
  • Jeneba
    Jeneba Posts: 699 Member
    Options
    I know this post isn't calling out anyone in particular, but remember, this doesn't necessarily apply to everyone. I'm VERY short and have a small bone structure. Following even this advice (maintenance cals - even only 10%) takes me right around that magic 1200, by the time I'm near my goal the minimal 10% is under 1200, I believe.

    Yeah, if you're a 6 foot, 300 pound man exercising daily, 1200 cals is definitely not the way to go. But for the other 5 foot desk job girls, 1200 is not starvation. Rather than take these rules as hard and fast ("never eat less than 1200 no matter who you are or what your situation!"), it's much better to work out the best plan for your personal weight loss. Of course this isn't to say every shortie can eat this much (or little, rather), as I know of several in my family alone who can eat much more thanks to vigorous daily exercise.

    I still keep myself over 1200 a day because I like how I feel best around 1300, but there are definitely people over 10 years old that 1200 is just fine for.

    EXACTLY!!!! And - PLEASE don't get all TESTY when you prescribe something for other people, especially if your circumstances are QUITE different than theirs. At my tiny size, even 1200 calories will NOT allow me to lose weight, no matter how much extra exercise i pack into the day. I am 55 yrs. old, I KNOW MY OWN BODY. YOU do NOT. Dang! I am soooo crabby from this!
  • kryptonitekelly
    kryptonitekelly Posts: 335 Member
    Options
    Im 5`2!!
    I eat 2000 cals. I don't gain. Infact I lose or maintain.
  • court182
    court182 Posts: 307
    Options
    http://www.healthstatus.com/calculate/calories-to-lose-weight

    Thanks for posting thisI calculated my calories and -20% of my maintenance came out to be EXACTLY what I have my goal as...YES! Glad to know I'm on the right track!
  • beggaboo2000
    beggaboo2000 Posts: 70 Member
    Options
    bump for later
  • sammanchester
    sammanchester Posts: 32 Member
    Options
    I know this post isn't calling out anyone in particular, but remember, this doesn't necessarily apply to everyone. I'm VERY short and have a small bone structure. Following even this advice (maintenance cals - even only 10%) takes me right around that magic 1200, by the time I'm near my goal the minimal 10% is under 1200, I believe.

    Yeah, if you're a 6 foot, 300 pound man exercising daily, 1200 cals is definitely not the way to go. But for the other 5 foot desk job girls, 1200 is not starvation. Rather than take these rules as hard and fast ("never eat less than 1200 no matter who you are or what your situation!"), it's much better to work out the best plan for your personal weight loss. Of course this isn't to say every shortie can eat this much (or little, rather), as I know of several in my family alone who can eat much more thanks to vigorous daily exercise.

    I still keep myself over 1200 a day because I like how I feel best around 1300, but there are definitely people over 10 years old that 1200 is just fine for.

    ^^^^ This! ^^^^
  • rivergod151
    rivergod151 Posts: 6
    Options
    I don't completely agree with that, sorry to say. I have a friend who used to be over weight and her doctor told her she had to Lose a certain amount of weight before a certain date for her op to remove lumps in her breasts and then take fat from her legs to fill them out etc. not being disagreeable, just saying there are situations where you sometimes need to reach a goal weight by a specific date. But obviously that rapid weight loss isn't ment to be a long term diet plan..she now maintains with a healthy diet
  • rivergod151
    rivergod151 Posts: 6
    Options
    But what if you have to lose X pounds by a certain date? I don't have the time to do anything long term. I need to drop another 13 pounds in a little over 4 months.

    Not to be mean, but... there's is no valid reason anyone has to lose X pounds by a certain date.


    ^^ this
  • RAFValentina
    RAFValentina Posts: 1,231 Member
    Options
    This has probably been posted many many times, but I'm sick of people posting
    topics saying they can't lose any weight, and you ask how many calories they consume.
    And they'll tell you less than 1200. Are you serious? are you joking? A 10 year old eats more than that.

    First of all, go find out what your calorie maintenance is.
    Second of all, decrease the amount of calories by 10-20%. For example, if maintenance is 2000 calories
    then to lose weight, consume 1600-1800. That's it, it's that easy. Why are people under eating?
    Every single athlete which competes in a sport with specific weight divisions, whether it be an MMA fighter
    or a wrestler or a boxer etc, and especially body builders (when it comes to cutting weight)
    will tell you exactly the same thing, if you want to cut weight, eat 10-20% under your maintenance.
    If you eat under at 1200 calories:

    1) metabolism will slow down
    2) body will try to retain what little that you eat as fat for energy
    3) when you eat high calories again, you bet that you will gain all that weight you lost back

    Anyway, that's just me venting. Not picking on anyone, it's more out of me wanting to help people.
    Because I've been there and I've done that, and 1200 calories or less is not the way to go. You got to
    eat to lose weight, SOUNDS RIDICULOUS RIGHT? well it ain't, not even the slightest. =]

    Maybe you could explain to all of them exactly where the 1200 number comes from and why it chooses "eating" other parts of you over fat and why when you eat normally again the weight piles on? Then maybe once and for all they'd understand and not undereat because it makes sense to them... at the moment everyone is told, less calories in more calories out which makes more sense than eat 1200 or more (which to be honest I think is a figure based on the average female of a certain height/build and mass at a certain rate to drop weight and in fact taller and heavier women would need more...)Noone is clear if this is a NET goal or a GROSS goal as we're told more often than not that the "1200"kCal / day minimum is to allow us to get sufficient miconutrients and macros for a day... but surely if you're working out you need more, such as sodium, potassium, iron (all lost in sweat)???

    Please if you're going to put statements like that down and make people feel like an idiot...which am sure some will be, then explain the science, because until you do and whilst eating less than 1200kCal NET people will continue to do so because it works.

    PS... in spite of the rant I believe you are right but we need to explain the science... I don't know why it is so but I am not on a 1200kCal a day diet so wouldn't know as hasn't appeared on my radar yet!
  • kryptonitekelly
    kryptonitekelly Posts: 335 Member
    Options
    I think this post is mainly aimed to the people who are not morbidly obese where they have to get advice from a doctor. Even then they are monitored.
  • ekeledo
    ekeledo Posts: 15
    Options
    Serious debate going on here. I suppose it is the matter of what works to whom. I personally discovered that i have to eat more to lose weight. Thank god for the community posts here!! :) I have been tryingt to lose weight for some time now and thought that eating less is the key. So i was quite stressed out when i started exercising and still lost nothing for weeks..i was actually gaining!! (was eating around 1200-1300 cals). so now increased my intake to 1600. And it seems to be working now - been doing it for the last 2 days and my weight has gone down by apprx 0.5 pounds. So I personally am thankful for these posts...it helped me!!
  • RAFValentina
    RAFValentina Posts: 1,231 Member
    Options
    I fully agree that everyone should do what works best for them as individuals. But unless you've tried different things, you can't really say what works best for you.

    It's been my experience that with just about everything in life, there is such a thing as trying too hard. If you're dating and try to hard, you make the person you're trying to date run scared thinking you're desperate. If you're in school, learning all through the semester is better than cramming right before the test. Trying to run... you're better off slowing your pace and having enough endurance to run the whole distance than trying to sprint as fast as you can and burning out quickly. Family vacations were the epitome of trying too hard... soooo much work and fuss trying to make something the perfect relaxing moment! :laugh:

    So why wouldn't losing weight be any different? Why wouldn't it be better to set an easily attainable goal with a small to moderate calorie deficit?

    BTW... just upped my calories to 1840 plus exercise calories, and I'm still losing weight while "on maintenance." Yet a few years ago, I was struggling to lose while eating less than 1000 a day and blamed my crappy middle age metabolism. :laugh:

    Just to highlight what has been said here. You need to bear in mind also that if you are losing weight on a VLCD, a large percentage of that will be lean mass and not fat. The number on the scale needs to be a low priority - health, wellbeing and fitness should take precedent.

    Negative... if you are a lean individual this will be the case, if you are an obese individual the larger proportion of weight loss will be fat loss as body can handle it... http://caloriecount.about.com/forums/weight-loss/truth-starvation-mode This article is backed up by leading experts in the field and there are links to their research. There's some good points on there too and why it can be potentially dangerous especially as to eating after being in starvation. Also it gives a nice reccomendation that you should eat the maintenance calories for your goal weight to safely lose weight as this will apply the right amount of calories for that body whether it to be lose or to gain (as some people on here want to do that too!)
  • RAFValentina
    RAFValentina Posts: 1,231 Member
    Options
    Have you ever heard of the military? I get weighed every month and my body fat is calculated. I must make progress every month and be in compliance within a year. Otherwise, I will be discharge. And I cannot gain the weight back within a year after loosing the weight as I won't be given another chance to loose it. So yes, there are reasons to loose by a certain date, and I am going to loose by that date by tracking calories along with swimming and weight training.

    I agree with this and our military has just got really tough on this after not being so strict with it for years. Thankfully for me I'm not overweight and will never let myself get that way but I know plenty people who are and it's really stressful as they have to lose the weight by a certain time or at least be fit enough to pass the fitness test and then go on remedial training to lose weight and reduce waist size.
  • wiggs46
    wiggs46 Posts: 1
    Options
    I just checked out the suggested calories on the site mentioned and it was about the same as on here, they were the lowest you should go though.
  • RAFValentina
    RAFValentina Posts: 1,231 Member
    Options
    Some people got all butt hurt and offended ;D
    and I've realized there are only a few people who took it way too hard
    ALSO i realized all the ripped body builders and people (both men and women) who replied, were very supporting,
    so thanks for supporting ;D not that this is a cause or anything haha
    ANYWAY! at the end of the day, I'm fit as f**k, so do what ever the FU*CK YOU WANNA DO :D
    The last line of your post here says (maybe) you finally got the point. Do what works for YOU.,.. and let others do what works for them. What works for a body builder (whatever you call it), isn't necessarily what works for someone who is just trying to get in the normal range on the BMI chart and live a healthier life.

    Ah, to have the metabolism of a 20 year old! I should have looked at some of the poster's ages before commenting. There's a world of difference between a 20 year old guy who's super fit and a 40 year old chick that's 100 lbs overweight. Big difference.

    Exactly...There are a lot of things to take into account with regards to how much to eat.

    For example
    Gender
    Height
    Weight
    Activity level
    Body Composition (It is more dangerous for a lean individual to go on a calorie restricted diet than an overweight or obese person because some of the energy gained from breaking down the body can be from vital organs such as the heart in obese and overweight people, a larger percentage is from fat... however they should still exercise caution.)
    The 1200 figure is based on averages using a standard model, so for some people this number should be less and others, more. For me, I believe it should be more (around 1300 as my TDEE is around 2300-3000 depending on if I do none, one or two workouts but it averages around 2700 and I'm 174.5cm, and weigh between 69Kg and 73Kg on a weekly basis, female, aged 23)
    As you get older this number drops and as you get heavier, it increases.

    My personal recommendation is that you shouldn't drop that low and be patient WHERE POSSIBLE, to lose the weight slower as you can ease in to the lifestyle changes, not put too much stress on your body and eat a good amount of food to sustain fat loss and keep you healthy. Look at it this way, getting your energy from a starchey potato full of vitamins and iodine(great for thyroid health) and slow release energy (keeps you going for longer so maybe you could do an extra 20 mins in the gym and burn off some fat!) versus fat? Which would you go for?

    Also at a deficit of 1000 calories, you are putting so much strain and stress on your body and to lose weight the recommendation is that you workout moderately for 45-60 mins 5 days a week as opposed to 30 mins x 5 days a week to stay healthy. Your body needs nutrients to repair and get strong and build muscle where there was once fat...which will look smaller that the fat but be like a slick fast jet aeroplane burning lots and lots of energy but skinny! It's not fair on your poor old body to but it under this stress and strain, we all have enough with our daily lives... This is why some lean individuals die as a result of shocks to there diets especially in a calorie deficit, they can be using tissue from their vital organs, like heart, for energy, leaving them with a weakened heart... anorexia sufferers are like this and their compulsive exercising leaves the heart more vulnerable to arrest.

    Just some things to think about. You can still lose a good amount of weight on any deficit, if you can eat the maintenance of what you want to become because that will be the best way to ease in to the new you and when it happens, you won't have to change anything! Just keep going! This provides a natural deficit (or increment if you're trying to gain) at a healthy loss. It may be slower but it certainly is safer!
  • RAFValentina
    RAFValentina Posts: 1,231 Member
    Options
    I just checked out the suggested calories on the site mentioned and it was about the same as on here, they were the lowest you should go though.

    Why?

    MFP isn't the god of knowledge on tis and is based on statistics of an AVERAGE person... 1200kCal would be far too low for a lass like me standing stauesque at a muscular 5' 9" and 72Kg, especially when i workout up to twice a day (hard cardio x2 AND weights) and so burning a lot more off.

    That 1200 applies to someone who is of a certain height and build, weight and gender and (based upon a healthy BMI) who is sedentary and to allow them to get the right amount of bare nutrition HER body will need!
  • BettysBops
    BettysBops Posts: 1
    Options
    Playing devil's advocate here....I recently had 2 heath checks, 1 BUPA and 1 Nuffield, neither of which shrank back when I told them of the 1200 calorie suggestion. Common sense ought to apply here, you know that a balance of lean meats, fish, pulses, oats and fibre are your friends and you can have a full tummy as much as you want as long as you try and offset it with some form of cardio activity.

    I also know that as a 5'6" 146 lb woman of 30 trying to lose 1 stone it appears to be the hardest thing in the universe.

    I absolutely know that I could survive just fine on 1200 calories. The biggest enemy for me is booze. Without a doubt, if I cut it out completely I would be certainly finding it easier to stay on 1200 and give myself a fighting chance of actually losing the weight.

    I have precious little time in my life for exercise however I will be sticking to my 30 min walk in the morning and also re starting Zumba and 1 other exercise class in a week, just to get me moving more! Couple that with stripping out booze 6 out of 7 days I hope that will at least bring me closer to where I want to be without going into "starvation mode".

    I believe it can be done.
  • RAFValentina
    RAFValentina Posts: 1,231 Member
    Options
    For those that reallllly don't get the science of it all, and having done starvation mode accidentally (eating the safe calorie amount but working out loads for my training and not eating it back... partly as a result of the exercise as the hard cardio supressed my appetite for about the length of my workout which was often 90 mins cardio twice a day plus weights) by myself and lost a lot of weight but gained it all back eating normally, I just want to show you a great article that explains it all quite scientifically and logically so that you have an understanding of nutrition for yourself and what a safe number is for YOU as an individual. I'm quite tall and was quite muscular and doing a lot of sports and should have eaten a lot more, I'd have still lost weight. I wasn't trying to lose a lot as was a healthy BMI, just a few lbs to look a little slinkier, I ended up losing 8lbs in 2 weeks one of those weeks it was a 5lb loss, more worryingly the second one. I "had" that much to lose but I "didn't" if that makes sense? As a result, my periods stopped. My boyfriends, aunty, uncle, parents and friends said i was too skinny and were concerned. I got fattened up over Christmas.


    http://caloriecount.about.com/forums/weight-loss/truth-starvation-mode/page/1 Link to great article

Categories