eating 1200

It should also be noted that losing muscle means a slower metabolism and, therefore, a higher chance of gaining the weight back unless you intend to remain on a 1200 calorie/day diet for the rest of your life. That sounds like hell to me, but to each their own. I'll happily eat away my 2,800 calories a day and look awesome doing it!

Agreed! A few years ago I lost a great deal of weight and got "skinny" but I was having trouble increasing my muscle tone. I was working out and eating 1200 calories per day. By not eating my exercise calories I was not allowing my body enough nutrients to build muscle, instead I was losing it along with the weight. Not to mention, muscle burns more calories than fat so you don't want to lose muscle mass. Also, to me 1200 calories is pretty restrictive. I think for most of us it is, many of us are here to lose weight and if 1200 calories did not seem like very little food, we wouldn't be here in the first place! And might I add, I did in fact gain the weight back and that is why I am here. For MOST people, 1200 calories a day is not a sustainable life goal. Not to mention it is almost definitely under your BMR. To each his own, but I think if you look all over the site and other health resources you will find that eating exercise calories and eating a net minimum of 1200 is the right way to go! Good luck!

[/quote]

I agree that 1200 right now is easy because I am on a "diet" but probably not easy to do for the rest of my life. If I continue to make good choices but eat more I will probably be ok. It's also a lot about what you put in your body, and not always necessarily how much.
[/quote]

Definitely, gotta have lots of good protein for the awesome toned muscles we'll have! I think it also helps to change things up to see what works. I recently upped my cals to 1450 on non-workout days and will eat any additional exercise on workout days. I know people on the site who have upped their cals in 100 increments to see what works for them and have found that they can lose on more than 1200. It is def a strange concept to me, I always figured the less you eat the more you lose! I know I like to eat though, so the more I can have, the better!

EDIT: I tried to delete my part of the "quote" to respond to you, but then your part didn't "quote" right! I am new and forum illiterate!

personally i eat 1500-1600 on average and eat back very little (if any) of my exercise calories. but with the way im eating, what im eating, when im eating...im just not hungry and im losing weight so i dont stress about having a much lower net (often less than 1000)

I started MFP in july 2010 and have lost 99lbs only 1.5 lbs to go to reach my original goal of 100 lb weight loss. I have done it eating 1250 cals a day not eating back my exercise cals and exercising 30-90 mins 6xs a week. You need to find what works for you. Everyone is different........

When I first started needing to lose weight about 15 years ago, I went from a 35+% body fat % and a size 12/14 (US) to a size 8, 18% BF by eating on average (weeks did vary) about 1800 - 2000 calories. I did not do much cardio but weight trained 3 x week. I pretty much ate what I wanted. It took me about 2 years to get there and I sustained this for 5 years until I got very ill (not food or exercise related!).

After my illness I put a lot of weight on and at my heaviest was 202lb. So I decided to do something about it about 2 years ago and restricted my calories to about 1500, did not eat my calories back and did alot of cardio and quite a bit of strength training. After about 3 months, I had lost about 20lb - hurray I hear people say....not!! I had my body fat tested at the beginning and after 3 months in the water dunking thing (very accurate but I cannot remember what it is called!!). I had lost more muscle than fat. I was baffled - how could I have possibly lose muscle as I was weight training. The reason - I was not eating enough and all the weight lifting possible would not have changed that fact.

I am now back to eating much higher calories - 1745 goal plus my exercise calories (which are never very much as I pretty much only weight train) - and so far so good.

My little 'cheat' is that I usually go a little under in the week (only by about 50 - 100 cals a day at the most) and use these at the weekend when I do not usually work out.

So, from someone who has done this both ways (the eating too low was just inattention and lack of understanding on my part), eating more definately works for me if I want to lose weight while keeping my lean muscle mass maintained and also, do it in a more sustainable way (1700 - 200 calories is far more sustainable and more fun than 1200 or even the 1500 I was at before) like I did the first time round.

Anyway, as you have seen, there are a lot of people who will argue both sides here. Whatever decision you make, I would urge you to keep track of your body fat %. It is especially important to women to keep a healthy lean body mass for the health benefits. That, along with measurements, will allow you to better monitor what works for you while keeping healthy.

WOW, a lot for me to consider. Thank you each and every one of you for your input. I think I will have to experiment and see what works best for my body that is all. I have not had any cheats or bad days in nearly three weeks. I find the less crap you put in your body, the less your body craves it. I have been focusing on what it is I am eating, like the carbs and the sugars and salts the most. I know there is going to be a day when the husband wants to go out to eat or there is a party or something and then I don't want to freak out because I don't know how many calories is in something. I also agree with one of the posts on here that there should be a daily allowance for error because just because it says that you burned so many calories in a workout, what if you didn't go as hard that day, or went harder another day. It will all even out I am sure but I really want to trust this process. The first 5 pounds came off pretty easy but this week I haven't changed what I am eating and it has stalled already. It has only been three weeks and this week kind of sucked in the weight department.

take measurements, normally when the scale wont budge your inches are going down .... I lost no weight last week but I lost over 8 inches across my hips, bust, waist and belly .. then this week my loss was 1.8lbs .... think of no weight loss as your body getting ready for a big weight loss

EVERYONE is different from activity level to what their body is sensitive to (sugar, starch, carbs). I don't think there is a live or die by formula to losing & maintaining...long story short to maintain & lose you must make a lifestyle change. Find what works for you. What works for me...cut starch, carbs & sugar...I eat about 1200 (many times less) & am doing well. I have energy & have 5 kids. I eat mostly organic & gluten free & lean proteins, fruits & high fiber veggies.

When on 1200 calories per day, WHAT you eat is vitally important.

Agree

edit, wrong quote

Starving yourself works (which is what 1200 calories is to someone who's my height). But eating at your TDEE also works. I've lost 27 pounds and weigh 123 pounds (I'm 5'7). Woopie! * celebrate* *eats more then 1200 cals worth of food*

It depends entirely on what you eat. 1200 calories per day is not starving yourself if what you eat is good food.

Excuse my typing-android keyboard

I would recommend 1500 calories for women and 1800 calories for men(depending on a person's weight as well and how much exercise she/he does). Not 1200 because it's too low. It'll just make you miserable and such.

I have been reading a lot on here about eating more calories for success but what I am wondering is if anyone is having good results with NOT eating your exercise calories back and sticking to the 1200 recommended calories?? Curiosity has me wondering if it's possible to eat 1200, exercise and still lose. It seems that the hot topic is always about eating more but to me this just doesn't make sense, even though it is explained well.

The thing is - MFP doesn't set just 1200 calories.

it sets 1200 NET calories, so 1200 + exercise calories.

People just chose not to follow it because they assume less food = more weight loss.

If they aren't going to follow MFP's logic then they should find their Total Daily Expenditure including exercise and work out their defict from there.

Too often people come here, they ignore all the stickied threads above which explain how the site is supposed to work, and away they go.

This site rec 1200 cals for me as well, but when I talked to the trainer at my gym he told me if I am working out I should be eating at least 1400 and no less. Otherwise your body goes into starvation mode and stores fat. You have to eat cals to lose weight. strange I know.