To think 2000 calories a day is a crazy amount of food.

[HairsprayBabe]

The government guidelines are just not helpful when it comes to reccomending a healthy calorific intake. I have been dieting for the past 6 months and am proud to say I have lost over 4 stone not so stealth stealth brag

But anyway, the government recommends on average 2000 calories a day for women, even before I was watching what I ate I didn't eat that much (logged in MFP before diet proper started), and these days I would consider 1500 cals a treat day.

I know it is all linked to TDEE and BMR but I cannot believe that the average woman in the UK could happily eat 2000 calories a day and not gain weight! Where has this figure come from? It really is no wonder that obesity is on the rise.

So IABU is 2000 calories a normal amount of food or are my views skewed?

[floraeasy]

We need to know in each case here HOW MUCH WEIGHT the calories they are eating is maintaining. It may be, OP, that you are looking to be very slim, I don't know.

[Dulcimena]

mutt I remember reading it in Just 17 (or similar) so that must have been mid '80s? I think the 800 was probably for dieting tbh, but yes 1000 was definitely presented as a reasonable "normal". I vaguely remember the figure of 1500, from maybe the late 90s/early 2000s?

I was shocked when I first heard the 2000 figure, but just assumed that the way it was all calculated had changed.

Have to say I definitely eat closer to 2k than anything else though!

[neonrainbow]

Calorie counting is no way to live. Everything in moderation, cut down on sugar and empty carbs.

[ToastDemon]

I'm assuming that saying the recommended calories for women used to be 800 a day is a joke?

Bearing in mind that during rationing, it was 3000 a day for adults.

[jennymac]

I would definitely eat at least 2000 calories worth a day and I am average height and a size 8-10. I work in an office so fairly sedentary lifestyle but do run a couple of times a week.

[gluteustothemaximus]

I think the opposite. That 2000 calories isn't much at all.

When I was doing my fitness pal app, I was shocked at how little food I could eat and yet hit the 1800 goal I was on.

1200 -1500, a treat day, I would feel very hungry on this.

Maybe I'm just greedy.

[threesocksmeghan]

Ever since I got a fitbit I've been shocked at how few calories I actually use. Even when I clear 10k steps it's only around 1700 calories. I have a desk job so have to really make the effort to be active too otherwise it's about 1300 a day.

Lunchtime meal deals/sandwiches are full of empty calories :(

[ToastDemon]

I think these threads always get a bit crazy, to the point where someone will come along and claim that women used to live on 200 calories a day and vanity sizing means that a size 6 used to be a size 22.

[Janeofalltrades1]

2,000 kcal a day sounds about right. If it makes you fat, it could mean you're eating 2,000 kcal of food with high fat and sugar.

[PollyPerky]

One thing I'm noticing on threads about weight is we seem to be going into a new territory slim shaming.

It used to be frowned on to criticise people who were admitting they were overweight.

Now it appears you are mocked and accused of 'showing off', 'stealth boasting ' etc if you state your low weight.

I am slim. I work hard at it. I don't go around telling everyone how much i eat or how much /little I weigh.

But I am getting annoyed at how Mnetters pounce on people who say they can live quite happily on 12oo cals or whatever and weight 8st or whatever.

Peace and love darlings!

[PollyPerky]

If it makes you fat, it could mean you're eating 2,000 kcal of food with high fat and sugar.

LOL! Calories are calories. 100 cals of carrots is the same as 100 cals of chocolate.

That's the whole point of their value. It doesn't matter what they are (except in terms of nutritional value.)

[ToastDemon]

Actually Polly that's not strictly true. In processed foods, all of the calories are available (to your digestive system).
If you eat something unprocessed this isn't the case. Nuts are a good case in point - not all of their calorie content will be available to your system.

[ayahuasca]

They're not exactly the same, anyone gaining weight will gain both fat and lean mass but it's possible to tilt this in favour of lean mass - just like bodybuilders with their 'clean' v 'dirty' bulking cycles.

[ChocChocPorridge]

I'm only 5' tall - 2000 calories is absolutely too much for me. I maintain at around 1500 (sedentary job, but I do have kids), and losing weight I have to get creative and low carb/do a lot of exercise or I'm eating almost nothing...

The amount of exercise you have to do to burn off one doughnut is crazy

[Amanduh]

2,000 calories is not necessarily 'a lot of food.' I'm 5,10 and look ridiculous if I eat less than that regularly as I lose weight. 2200 maintains me at a size 8 with moderate exercise and plenty of fruit and veg. I eat quite healthily too. It is a guideline. A guide.

[floraeasy]

www.bbc.co.uk/guides/zy7j2p3

Using this calculator, I entered the following info

5 ft 4 in
female
9 stones
moderate exercise 3-5 days a week
aged 60

It gave me the result of

BMI 21.5
Calories of 1994 to maintain

So obviously, being shorter, older, less active would need even less of course. To lose, you'd need to cut that further still.

[Smitff]

If it's the "one size fits all" approach that you object to, why did you start a thread called "AIBU To think 2000 calories a day is a crazy amount of food"??

It may be a crazy amount of food for you, but it's not enough for me to maintain my weight. YAB ridiculous.

If you want to publicise your weight loss and zeal for this low-carb diet (sorry, lifestyle change), just do it. There's no need to go round the houses making sweeping statements that contradict themselves.

Btw, carbohydrates are an essential contributor to human (and most mammalian) health. Cutting them out or reducing them will of course result in weight loss. Good luck maintaining that, and suffering no side effects in the long run. There is not substitute for exercise (enough if the correct type) and a healthy, well-balanced diet consisting of a bit of everything. It's harder work than simply cutting out sugar and carbs.

Don't mean to be snide, just object to double standards.

[Dulcimena]

Not a joke at all, Toast!

[ToastDemon]

Dulcimena do you have any links for it? Because 800 a day is an insanely low amount at population level. The number of women who wouldn't lose weight on that must be statistically negligible.

To the point where if you fed prisoners that, I imagine Amnesty International would take a dim view.

[gluteustothemaximus]

As a quick idea.

Breakfast, cornflakes and cup of tea
Lunch, tuna sandwich with walkers crisps
Dinner, chicken pie

Have already gone over 1750.

Doesn't include fruit, snacks, drinks, extras. Yes you can cut the crisps. Just drink plain water all day. Have lower calorie dinner.

But it's easy to 'spend' your calories, I think.

[OdinsLoveChild]

Ive just tried the link above and it says I need 1552 calories to maintain my weight and it put me unto the overweight bracket.

I'm under 5ft tall and doing moderate exercise hence the being overweight and needing only a small amount of calories. I had my GP work out how many calories I needed a few years back and it was only around 1200.

2000 would make me put on a huge amount of weight. I'm pretty sure the 2000 calories is based on an average height person (5ft 6 for women) doing 30 minutes moderate exercise a day.

[FunkinEll]

I can easily maintain my weight on 2000 calories. I walk a lot most days and run/ do a HITT class 2/3 times a week.

I think the higher your muscle mass, the more calories you burn doing nothing at all.

I tried the biometric machine at the gym last week and it said I would need 1500 calories per day to maintain my weight if I wasn't moving.

[Dulcimena]

Toast trying to find something now... GDAs on food labelling apparently came in early '90s so it must have been prior to that. I can clearly remember reading that figure in print and would have got it from somewhere!

[frenchlion]

I'm 5'2", and 46, and moderately active, and need more like 1500 cals per day. Close to 2000 and I pile it on

YANBU!

[floraeasy]

Each decade after age 20, your daily energy needs may decrease by as much as 150 calories, according to the American Council on Exercise

That's 600 fewer calories a day for a 60-year-old compared to their 20-year-old self!

That's just the ageing factor. Plus, it could be lower depending on physical difficulties hampering your ability to exercise like you used to.

No wonder middle-aged spread is so prevalent (I include myself in this).