Lower RDI than recommnded?

previous topic · next topic

Joined: Feb 11
Posts: 12

Posted: 06 Mar 2011, 01:59
Fatsecrets gave me 1600 calories for my RDI to lose 1 pound a week. How much lower can I go without going into starvation mode? Is 1200 too little? Is it worth it to go that low? Any comments will be greatly appreciated!


Joined: Feb 11
Posts: 10

Posted: 06 Mar 2011, 02:31
WOW! I also have an RDI of 1600 calories set by fatsecret. I gave myself 1200 a day because I am sedentary and am unable to exercise much because of arthritis etc. When I look at your exercise, I do believe that cutting back to 1200 would be detrimental to your health and difficult to maintain over a period of time. Keep eating and keep exercising. Good luck!

Joined: Jan 11
Posts: 387

Posted: 06 Mar 2011, 08:59
Pros: Lower calories intake in general results in faster weight loss. There are a lot of debate as to how low and for how long of taking in too few calories kick the body into starvation mode. I think it also depends on the person and his/her body makeup.

Cons: It may take longer to lose weight with a higher calories intake, but when you feed your body right, it is less likely to hit you with cravings. The way I look at it, you are not only trying to lose weight but establish better eating/exercising habits as well for the rest of your life. If you could lose weight at 1600 a day, why starve yourself?

FYI, I am only 120 lbs., I set my RDI at 1600 a day and am still losing, very slowing.

Joined: Apr 10
Posts: 283

Posted: 06 Mar 2011, 09:04
Since FS doesn't allow a 2 pound per week weight loss option (which most agree is still pretty safe), try some other calculators that do before dropping down as low as 1200. I like these two.


Joined: Sep 09
Posts: 36

Posted: 06 Mar 2011, 12:29
If you're a woman, 1200 is fine. Are you exercising? I would shoot for 1200 to 1300 and feel fine as long as you've had less than 1500. I find that shooting for the exact amount of calories have you going over some days, but if you shoot for the lower amount, you won't go over your 1600.

Do the same thing with your exercise. Shoot for 5 days and you'll consistently reach 3-5.

Joined: Feb 11
Posts: 12

Posted: 06 Mar 2011, 13:13
Thanks everyone!

Joined: Jan 10
Posts: 579

Posted: 06 Mar 2011, 17:36
I'm going to tenatively disagree. Not saying that for a female 1200 ISN'T fine, depending on your current weight/muscle mass/activity level/etc. But saying that just because you are a woman, 1200 is fine is ALSO not true. I'm a woman. I started a year ago at 270 pounds. I lost more weight eating 2000 calories a day than attempting to eat 1200. (And actually, eating only 1200 was a lot easier for me, because it took a lot of lettuce and fruit to reach the higher amount.)

At 220-ish pounds, I burn (according to my bodybugg, which all studies so far show to be very accurate) over 3000 calories each day. Saying that I could just eat 1200, a 1800 calorie deficit, MIGHT be true. but i've tried it. i STILL lose weight better when i aim for the 1700-1900 range than when i aim for the 1200 range.

it is a PERSONAL trail and error kind of decision, and there's no way i'm going to say you can or can't do it. everyones body works differently, and calories in vs calories out is a very simplified version of a very complex scientific process that i don't think anyone FULLY understands.

but i'd say at least give yourself a chance to see the results at different ranges. because a blanket statement of "this is whats good for you" from anyone, any website, any program, out there is lumping your very unique body into a very cookie cutter routine.


Joined: Feb 11
Posts: 12

Posted: 06 Mar 2011, 21:58
Thanks for your reply! what you say makes sense... I guess I will give 1,200 - 1,400 range a try and see how I feel with that! I'm a female, 195 lbs, 5'5" tall, sedentary except when playing w/kinect with the kiddos!... I'm bearly starting with this losing weight process and I hope I lose 50 lbs in a year!...

Joined: Feb 11
Posts: 156

Posted: 06 Mar 2011, 23:08
Good comments here. I think if we shot too low we set ourselves up to fail, both biologically and mentally as we are hungry always. I beleive in the approach of balance and patience. This is not the easiest, but the healthiest. It makes no sense to make oneself sick for the sake of weight loss. HEALTHY LIFESTYLE!
Do it now...tommorrow never comes!

Joined: Jul 10
Posts: 442

Posted: 07 Mar 2011, 00:53
Another thing to consider in setting your calorie count is what kind of lifestyle and eating pattern you imagine you'll need to have to keep the weight off. I think one of the things I've done wrong for many years is taking off weight by dropping down to 900-1100 calories per day for say 6 months -- by which time I had lost the weight, but I was starving all the time and sick to death of plain, non-fat yogurt. So I'd go back to my old ways and gain it all back. I think I've finally come to the realization that this is a recipe for failure, and that I have to find not a diet, but a lifelong eating plan. My 1350 RDI and glycemic eating plan gives me room to eat a surprisingly large and diverse amount of food, and I'm really confident I can maintain this not only for as long as it takes to lose the 100 pounds I set out to lose, but for far beyond to keep the weight off. I actually eat in the range of 1250-1450 per day, so I'm probably averaging 1350 per day across the week. I'm losing very slowly, but I AM losing, and I am very seldom hungry, so I'm satisfied that I've found an answer that works for me.

Joined: Feb 11
Posts: 530

Posted: 14 Mar 2011, 08:05
relz wrote:
Since FS doesn't allow a 2 pound per week weight loss option (which most agree is still pretty safe), try some other calculators that do before dropping down as low as 1200. I like these two.


Omg....... Seriously depressing...... Definitely must stick to the diet Embarassed
" Success is what you make it, there's no better time to make a change than the present."

"Wherever you go, no matter what the weather, always bring your own sunshine. "

Joined: Mar 11
Posts: 6

Posted: 14 Mar 2011, 08:35
My fs RDI was set at 2200 for a sedentary person. I was preforming light exericse 3 days a week so I put it at sedentary to see my results. Now I have started jogging 4 days a week and light weight training 2 days. According to the FS, I am considered very active (not in my opinion) and set my RDI at 3300 to lose another 10 lbs. 3300 sounds awful high...anyone have any experience with this

Forum Search
Advanced forum search

Latest Posts

Cassava cake (Filipino style) nutrients
would you consider this as <a title="Keto Diet" href="https://www.constantweig... Diet</a> recipe
by johnlurther on 18 Jun 18 08:15 PM
HCG Phase ll and HIIT workout
I've done HCG rounds before, I've always been successful. I never worked out too much though. This time I'm feelin like I need light resistant work and body weight work. I've read this ...
by Momzii on 17 Jun 18 09:50 PM
Problem of opening page food pictures
Hi I"m new here. When i open my webpage at the home page i think it is, the first thing i see which dominates my view is a picture of someone else's food. I do not find this helpful. Is there ...
by Pattience on 16 Jun 18 11:39 PM
Netflix Explained: Why Diets Fail
I really like this video. Let me know if you do, too.
by Barbara1207 on 16 Jun 18 01:03 PM
Plant Paradox - The Gundry Diet Experience
My doctor recently “prescribed” the Gundry diet for me, not to lose weight but to hopefully improve my health problems. I have Graves‘ disease (thyroid disease), which was in remission but no more, as ...
by Budshuman on 16 Jun 18 10:38 AM