To find it too hard to stick to 1200 calories a day

[Lilacdreamowl]

I’m two stone overweight. I’ve started calorie counting and upping up my steps and on couch to 5k in my third week.
i can’t stick to 1200 calories :( i find it very tough. I have one meal a day where i allow carbs that i like such as bread, rice or pasta as whenever I’ve tried very low carb it just doesn’t work. The other two meals I don’t have carbs.
im ranging between 1205-1500 this week.

Can I still lose weight if i do a smaller deficit instead? Wanted to hear other experiences on a smaller deficit and how long it took?

When going back to eating “normally” means eating 1650, for example, it’s not that hard because it just means adding in a couple of snacks or having desert sometimes, or having slightly bigger portions generally. That isn’t a huge change really.

To lose 1lb a week needs a calorie deficit of around 500 calories a day , so people who are smaller to start with need to go down to 1000/1200, and I can’t see the difference between that and someone who has daily needs of 2000 and then goes down to 1500?

It is why losing weight can be very hard when you are close to your target weight, as your daily calorie needs reduce as you are losing weight (very overweight people need more calories on a daily basis just to maintain, as all the excess weight means that their body has to work harder to do anything at all)

There is no such thing as starvation mode, it doesnt exist

When you say 'eating normally', what do you mean by that. If you mean eating to maintenance, then nothing will happen, the current weight will maintain

If you mean eating the way the person was before they lost weight, assuming they were eating in excess of their calorie needs, then what do you think will happen?

My maintenance is 1547, say 1550, if I eat more than that, I can exepct to put on weight. I want to lose weight so I need to eat much less than that. 1lb per week loss puts me on just over a thousand cals.

1200 is really low.

My PT refuses to make plans with calorie goals this low.

you have to be realistic about what your calories were before, for a start, to be overweight.

eg - I was overweight and was
probably doing about 2300 a day. First defecit was 2000. Then moved to 1800. Keep adjusting.

on 1200 I’d be exhausted

You have a good PT! And sounds like a very sensible and sustainable approach to weight loss.

Bloody hell. Precisely 1547 eh? I couldn’t tell you the calories in anything. I couldn’t tell you how many calories I eat a day. But I’m active, I eat healthily. Had to up protein through peri menopause. I had to cut cardio and up weights. Weight doesn’t yo yo and I don’t have an obsessive, unhealthy relationship with food.

People on this thread need to be careful. 1200 calories will really screw up your metabolism and your endocrine system.

Keep telling yourself starvation mode doesn’t exist. Your body will start burning through muscle (which you need) at 1200 calories. It will adjust to the lower calories and your metabolism will slow. Then when you start eating more calories as you inevitably will, you put more weight on. And repeat. And be miserable.

Why?

If someone has a daily need of 2100 and the reduce to 1800 to lose weight, will their body start “burning through muscle” and forever mess their metabolism up?

If not, what on earth is the difference when someone with a daily need of 1500 goes down to 1200 to lose weight?! You know everyone isn’t the same height don’t you?

Because 1200 calories is completely unsustainable and implies that
someone is not active (as they’d need more calories). Therefore it’s not healthy. You’re better off moving more rather than sitting on your arse all day then eating like a toddler…

Love the toddler reference which gets trotted out.
I think it should be compulsory that when someone says " I eat only protein and spend 30 mins doing bench presses a day, it works" they should add "for me" on the end.
Calories in vs calories out works for me. I am short, Apple shaped and 57. I've done all the calculators and the thing that works for me is 1000 cals a day. I am not a toddler. I am not starving all the time. I include a decent amount of protein and calcium in this. I have 1 st to go to get to the healthy category. I am doing it for me. When I have got to the healthy category, I will go up to 1400 ish to maintain and will add in some extra exercise. Which is my next phase. It will work for me.

It will work for you as you aren’t doing enough exercise clearly.

That’s the issue here. People are cutting calories to a ridiculous level. If you ate properly and exercised more that would be a far more healthy way to do it. Don’t care how short you are.

These threads are ridiculous and verging on pro-ana..1000 calores a day! Mind you, I remember another thread where someone was arguing 800 calories was fine.

Yes everyone is different. But exercise and healthy eating works for all. Not calorie counting and restricting (then putting all the weight back on again in the future).

A dietitian I know is insistent that 14 Cals minimum and 1500 preferable for someone of average height. It's difficult to meet all nutritional requirements below that.

You need to find a diet that is sustainable for you long term. If that means losing weight a lot slower, so be it. Unless it's sustainable and enjoyable you are only going to put it back on later. I lost a stone and a bit over two years and was doing well until my mum died and it all went a bit shit and I put it back on. Going to try again. At least stopping putting weight back on.

I have a disability that makes walking painful but can build it up. I need to start by walking round the gardens again before I can venture further. I used to know the step count for each path. I think I am only going to be able to manage one lap to start.

Starvation mode is rubbish. No fat people in concentration camps, were there?

Im only going by what the TDEE calculators come out at, it feels dishonest to post a figure thats not true, thats all

Starvation mode does not exist, otherwise people wouldnt die of starvation. The very small change in metabolism that occurs when someone is barely eating, isnt enough to compensate for the lower calories

Once you start eating to maintenance, you'll stay steady because that is what your body needs.

I’m 5ft 3 and want to loose about 20lbs. I’m using a calorie app and I’m not that active but try to do about 3 evening walks a week. I’m currently on approx 1600 calories a day and have lost 5lbs in 3 wks. I’m going for slow and steady particularly as I’m mid 40s now. I’m finding 1600 is manageable and I have 1 weekend evening where I tend to just have what I want.

That’s great @MissTruecrime 😊

Seems strange to have to explain this but starvation mode - the effects kick in when you start eating normally again. It’s not about starving to death. If you eat less then your metabolism slows. You eat more and it’s still sluggish and therefore you put more weight on. Yo yo dieting and messing about with calorie restriction doesn’t work. This is really basic stuff.

Ridiculous to compare to concentration camps. Obviously at some point the body doesn’t have enough calories and you starve to death. But before that 🤯 you can mess up your endocrine system by restricting calories too much.

Look do what you want but 1000 calories a day is not healthy.

Is this a serious comment? That’s not what it’s about about:https://www.dietitianuk.co.uk/am-i-in-starvation-mode/
See the part where the body holds on to fat stores when you restrict calories.

The issues start when you start eating a normal amount of calories again. Something people in concentration camps don’t do, do they? Hence they are not fat….

She’s amazing - it’s been such hard work but I’ve actually felt ok and can’t imagine ever going back to dieting. Can’t believe what I put myself through doing Dukan 😂

20lbs is quite a lot to need to lose. I was doing 1,000 / day to drop 2kg in 2 weeks. I was 61kg to start with and 59Kg at the end. Both within healthy range I usually need 1600 to maintain I am 165cm.

I haven't read every response OP, but has anyone mentioned intermittent fasting?
I've lost nearly three stones in six months (so around half a stone a month) using this method.
I use Nutracheck and am allowed 1980 calories a day for five days and 800 for two. I am 57 and 5ft 4in. I have got quite a way to go yet though.
I find the relentless grind of low calorie every day hard going, but can manage two days easily. My 'fast' days are usually something like bagel thin, cheese spread and tomatoes for breakfast, low calorie HM soup for lunch and usually something fish or veg based for dinner, always HM. You have to watch things like rice, pasta etc like a hawk on fast days. I can usually manage to fit a hot chocolate made with skimmed milk and even a blob of squirty cream at bedtime.
The pay-off is five days where you can eat pretty normally. I always manage to fit in a tiny square of HM cake mid-afternoon and a nicer hot choc at bedtime when I am on non-fast days.
I've also upped by exercise, but not massivly. I do a walking exercise vid for about 10-15 minutes three times a week and try to get out for at least 30 minutes of brisk walking every day.
I just thought it might be useful to share.

She is doing it the right way - slow and steady and manageable long term without denying and starving herself.

This book is also great. Follow Ben Carpenter too for actual sensible advice

I have that problem. BMI in 'normal' range, but my waist is two inches over the recommended half your height. It's all gone on my stomach.

My TDEE is 1189 and I'm 5ft1.

Lifting weights is the answer to be able to eat more calories.

Same here its really stubborn

My waist is the same as it was 5stone heavier. Its come down from over 50 inches but is now 34 and has been like that for the last 5 stone. Just wont go any smaller

It needs to be 3 inches less for my height/waist ratio.