1200/1500 Rule

     Just wondering why the 1200 rule got so popular suddenly.  Does not really make sense to set a minimum number of calories one person could eat.  

     A example would be a 5' 11'' women with some muscle mass might need to eat above 1700 calories before her body begins to burn lean body tissue and hold on to fat reserves.  A sedentary 5' 1' women however might have to go below 1200 calories to see constant weight loss. 

      I am be wrong in the end but it just seems like most people seem to start at 1200/1500 calories to lose weight instead of figureing out what their body needs to maintain and slowly subtract calories from here.  I know the first way is much much easier but it can actually be dangerous and hinder weight loss.

    Sorry for the little rant but its just something that has been on my mind.

there is actual science behind the 1200 rule (If someone has all the stats, please post it lol) and 1200 is the calories that your organs use just function daily, even if you just sat still. The subject in this question was a short, thin woman.

I am a 5'1 woman. When I ate below 1200 my weight loss was okay then came to a halt, so I would never adivse anyone to eat below that and expect it to work for the long run. I am actually slowly trying to rework my program in terms of eating and working out to get back on track. But I defnietely know that going below 1200 will not help me.

I agree that people need to find a healthy way to lose weight, but it can be confusing. I ate too little by accident and following the wrong advice- it happens. People need to be patient and understand that weight loss is a slow, steady process.

I agree. I think the 1200/1500 gets put out there a lot as a minimum amount no one should go under, but it seems quite a few people use it as a basis for their intake.  Use the tools, folks! :-)

points ^ up to what was previously said plus... the 1200/1500 rule is a general weight loss diet plan minimum threshhold widely recommended by the medical community and other reputable sources; but comes with the recommendation that some people may need to eat more if they are taller, larger, younger, etc...  It is simply a minimum recommendation.  When a person actually looks at calorie burn rates, the amount often will be more. 

But it should not be less unless you are supervised by your Doctor to make sure that you stay healthy and don't hurt yourself.  They would take periodic tests to make sure your not having kidney damage, kidney or gall stones, loss of bone density, hair loss or experiencing other signs of damage or malnutrition. 

I agree that the 1200 rule is only a minimum.  With my weight and height, I eat between 1700 and 2100 calories a day, depending on my exercise.  I never go below 1700.  This has worked well for my weight loss.  I've lost 37 lbs since Jan 14th!  It's good to know the absolute minimum, but folks should calculate their own specific needs to see what their minimum should be.

well, yeah you shouldn't eat less than 1200 calories/day...that's pretty much starvation, unless you are bedridden. and yeah, i agree with you i would hate to only eat 1200 calories a day...thats so boring just eat when you're hungry i think i eat around 1800 usually, and it still works eating 1000 a day will put you in starvation mode and you lose weight slowly, if at all trust someone who's tried it it's not fun, either...hunger pains are SO not sexy.

Also, most recommendations I've seen actually say to only go 500-1000 below your daily use.  500 calories a day below is about a pound a week.  So, if you need 2800 calories a day to maintain, you shouldn't go under 1800.  The 1200 is just an overall, applies to everyone, minimum.