Nothing wrong with 1200 calories if you are say 150 and under, 1200 is a good number for the op probably but being at 200lbs and working out an hour a day? Way too low. Eventually if op ends up there that is fine - when maintaining or whatever but to start out.
Nothing wrong with 1200 calories if you are say 150 and under, 1200 is a good number for the op probably but being at 200lbs and working out an hour a day? Way too low. Eventually if op ends up there that is fine - when maintaining or whatever but to start out.
The opposite is true. The bigger you are the fewer calories you need.
Have you seen the show "Heavy"? They feed them 1200-1500 calories and work out 4 hours a day. They can do that because they are severely obese.
Yeah that is what I will do, Simply try to find a target number that helps me lose weight but keep me full at the same time.. Thanks guys for the debate it helps me see all my options !!
Congrats ! I hope you find a good number to sit at!! One thing that helps too is to write everrrrything down and find out the real ~number of calories you are eating and tweak from there. You might be surprised, it could be way lower than you think!
Exercise for about hr
30 mins in the elliptical and the rest lifting weights and a high resistance bicycling for like 10 mins
Everyone has already commented on the calories. I just wanted to add that you shouldn't lift weights everyday. You need to let your muscles rest for a day in between. It is during rest that your body builds up your muscles. And I have been told you should do strength training first and then cardio second if you are going to both in the same day.
If you belong to a gym - you should talk to them, they can probably help you set up a work out plan.
i am also starting to doubt the old legend that if you eat too few calories your body will reach "starvation mode". -fm
I couldn't agree with you more! How many POW's come back at normal weight because of "starvation mode?" When you eat less than you burn you will lose weight. Period.
Oh, and OP--I haven't read all the replies but in my experience it absolutely DOES matter where those calories are coming from. A calorie doesn't equal a calorie. You body won't process a three hundred calorie slice of cake the same as it would a 4 oz portion of fish with a huge side of veggies.
If you will focus on "whole foods" you will most likely find you are satiated, feel better and are getting lots more fiber and nutrients than you ever could with the processed stuff. Processed stuff is usually higher in calories and has sugar added. What usually happens to me is my blood sugar is raised and it makes me want to eat more! Do some reading on not only whole foods but the Glycemic Index. In my experience, the GI has rung very true.
Oh, and OP--I haven't read all the replies but in my experience it absolutely DOES matter where those calories are coming from. A calorie doesn't equal a calorie. You body won't process a three hundred calorie slice of cake the same as it would a 4 oz portion of fish with a huge side of veggies.
If you will focus on "whole foods" you will most likely find you are satiated, feel better and are getting lots more fiber and nutrients than you ever could with the processed stuff. Processed stuff is usually higher in calories and has sugar added. What usually happens to me is my blood sugar is raised and it makes me want to eat more! Do some reading on not only whole foods but the Glycemic Index. In my experience, the GI has rung very true.
TOTALLY AGREE. I am on 1200 cals/day right now and you have to work hard to get your nutrients in. Dieting is not just about cutting mass it's about getting healthy and ensuring you are feeding your body the protein, iron, calcium, vitamins, fat, carbs, and many other nutrients it needs.
1200 is difficult because you really have to be extra careful about what you eat- not just how many calories but how much nutritional content you are putting in your mouth with each meal or snack. It's like a jigsaw puzzle- getting everything in so it will "fit" within the 1200 allotment AND with the protein/carb/fat and vitamin/mineral count you're supposed to have each day. Lots of fruits/veggies, protein (from soy products, lentils/beans, chicken, fish), dairy, and some grains should make up pretty much everything you eat. Nothing wrong with a bit of processed treat here and there, but it's really important to use your calories wisely
People lost at sea are also suffering from malnutrition. Eating too little results in this. Your body requires a certain number of calories just for daily functions. If you don't take in food to cover it, it will use muscle as well as fat and that is highly undesireable.
It's perfectly understandable to think that a larger person needs more calories because they do need more calories to maintain their weight both because all living tissue has energy needs and because the muscles demand more energy to move their weight. Rather than debate it lets take a look at scientific research report that has been done on the energy needs of the overweight and obese.
The OP is carrying around 100 lbs of fat. Crazy I know but that is the truth. Assuming the research is accurate that means her body could theoretically supply 3100 calories in energy a day from fat.
As you can see the more fat you have the larger deficit you can create.
That doesn't mean I am reccomending some kind of insane deficit. I'm not. Anyone who is thinking to go below 1000 calories should probably see a doctor first and everyone regardless of dieting or not needs to make sure they get their micronutrient needs met. Granted it is more difficult on lower caloires but many people have done it on 1,200 calories or even less.
I'm in the company of those who see no problem with a 1200 calorie diet as long as it's nutrient dense food. I can fit 3 servings of fruit, 3 servings of veggies, almost 100g of protein, calcium and healthy fat into 1200 calories. I don't personally eat 1200 a day, it's usually more like 1350-1500 because I like a couple snacks at night like yogurt or a fiber one bar, sometimes a vitatop. This whole week I've been eating at that level, exercising about 2 hours a day, I feel great and I haven't felt hungry at all. 1200 is completely doable if you're filling up on the right foods.
i am also starting to doubt the old legend that if you eat too few calories your body will reach "starvation mode". As another poster said, if that were true, people lost at sea wouldn't lose weight steadily! Also, people on shows like "heavy" wouldn't lose. i am not saying it has no credence, i just would like to learn more about it before i take it as truth.
I agree that you will lose in on a very low calorie diet...however it's WHAT you lose that concerns me. I'm convinced that a large majority of dieters are actually losing muscle (going on these semi-starvation diets) as well as fat.
This, as we all know, lowers metabolism and basically assures that we gain all the weight back x2! This is one reason why statistics repeatedly show that "slow and steady" wins the race...or to put it another way, people who lose weight rapidly (more than 2-3 lbs/week) have a much lower long term success rate than people who lose weight moderately (1-2 lbs/week).
Joy, that shouldn't be a problem as long as a person does strength training on a regular bases. If you're eating 1200 and just plain doing too much, your body is going to let you know because you will literally feel like you're starving. If that's the case then yeah, a person needs to eat more, but just because someone says you NEED more calories doesn't necessarily mean it's true. Each of our bodies works completely differently, You have to listen to your own body.
There are more then one big losers on here that are in maintainence (Lori Bell is one that comes to mind) She lost almost 200lbs on a 1200 diet and she's now been maintaining for a couple years and she does it on 1900 calories. It's definitely possible.
and tweak from there. You might be surprised, it could be way lower than you think!
Do some reading on not only whole foods but the Glycemic Index. In my experience, the GI has rung very true.
This is one reason why statistics repeatedly show that "slow and steady" wins the race...or to put it another way, people who lose weight rapidly (more than 2-3 lbs/week) have a much lower long term success rate than people who lose weight moderately (1-2 lbs/week).
