To think the most fundamental problem with labelling calories...

[Lifeisgenerallyfun]

Is the fact it says recommended calories for women is 2000 per day For women and the calories are shown as a percentage of this.

Now I’m sure there’s some (probably outdated) science behind this but at 5 ft 3 and quite active my maintain calories is 1300-1400. So if I are the RDA I would be the size of a house in months unless I could burn the additional 700 calories a day.

Looking on here it seems a fairly common amount of calories to maintain for someone of my fairly average female height.

So AIBU to suggest that the first place to start educating people is to help them find out how many calories they should be eating, ie that chocolate bar is 1/6 of your RDA not 1/10

Calories are irrelevant anyway because they are not all made equal.
Different foods have very different impacts upon your body.

Agree - many women will gain on 2000 a day. Particularly post-menopause

So I suppose you'd have to either agree a new illustrative figure, or scrap showing the daily intake %age

The typical figure for men isn't one-size-fits-all either

Yes 2000 is a massive amount of calories for an average height or shorter woman

So AIBU to suggest that the first place to start educating people is to help them find out how many calories they should be eating

There’s nothing stopping people becoming educated about how many calories they should be eating. It is easier than ever nowadays with the internet and various diet/fitness/health apps. People managed to maintain healthy weights in the past without these modern gadgets - it is only greed and laziness that stops people doing so nowadays.

It's really not, I'm only slightly larger than average (5 7, 12 stone, so many many women are taller and/or heavier than me) and my TDEE is 2100-2300 per day and I'm not particularly active.

2000 is an average so by definition is too many for some women.

My reply was toslipper

No, the most fundamental problem with labelling calories is that the human body is not a bomb calorimeter.

I just think calories don't really help. I bet if you ate two thousand calories of lettuce daily you would probably lose weight. Your body doesn't know what a calorie is and how you digest, absorb and utilise your food will very much be personal to you.

Yabu. Obviously it's an average so won't apply to everyone.

But I'm 5ft 2 and eat about that (I don't count but its definitely not less) and maintain a healthy size. I am moderately active.

I think the one thing corona virus has shown is that people really don’t educate themselves, they expect everything to be handed to them on a plate. A lot of people will just go off the info on the packet. I just think the fact that for a lot of people they really need educating that their personal RDA will be different (mine always shows 1343 for instance. I really think they also need to scrap the percentages shown it is so misleading.

well it's not a bad start, even if not ideal.
Personally I track carbs rather than calories, and wish they were included in the top nutrients that have traffic lights on packets.

• rather than having to get my glasses out and squint at the small print.

And for things that you're likely to consume in one go - highlight the portion!! - who is going to buy a ready to go soft drink and only drink 1/5 of it?

I'm nearly 6ft and wouldn't eat 2000 cals every day - my maintenance is below it

OP I suspect you're confusing BMR with TDEE. The former is your basic metabolic rate - your resting calory need, the latter is your total daily energy expenditure - your maintenance rate accounting for all activity. 1400 BMR is write right for your height but If you're quite active then your TDEE is likely to be closer to 1800.

"well it's not a bad start"

I would say it's a bad start to tell people to eat many more calories than they need!

I think the one thing corona virus has shown is that people really don’t educate themselves, they expect everything to be handed to them on a plate.

I thinI that’s unfair. There are SO MANY competing ideas about food and health - whether it’s the the sugar, the fat, the calories, the type of fat, the type of calories, the carbs... you could pick up 50 books on diet and none of them would agree with each other. Plus some people may not have the time, energy or maths ability to work all these things out.

I think the biggest problem is that the serving sizes on packaging aren't the recommended serving size for that product eg a serve of yoghurt is 200g but if you look on labels, their serve is usually much less.

Instead of allowing food manufacturers to create their own serves and providing comparison per 100g it should be compulsory for all products to have their nutrition labels stated per standard serve recommendations ie if a serve of yoghurt is 3/4 cup / 200g, than that is what all yoghurt tubs should show as a serve and then the corresponding nutritional panel for that serve. That would make it so much easier to know what you're eating.

I always find it funny that a serve of vegetables is 75g and a serve of fruit 150g. Consistent amounts are much easier to remember.

I think it’s more basic than that. Two things to consider- first, many people see 2000 cals as a target, not a limit i.e. that’s what they should aim to eat.
Second, I was recently at a presentation where the 2000 cals was shown in terms of actual foods e.g. what 2000 cals of carrots looks like, apples, doughnuts, crisps, beer, wine, chocolate etc. The reaction in the room was disbelief and actual straight up ridicule of the presenter.
This work needs to start in schools at a very early age.

I’ve recently started doing the 5:2 fast diet. It’s been hugely educational in terms of calories , serving size and nutritional value.

Tbh I thought that 2000 Cal was for men.

Plus some people may not have the time, energy or maths ability to work all these things out.

This! I have far more important things to be doing than working out how many calories I'm consuming each day - even if I wanted to!!!

No but a general awareness of the number of calories in restaurant meals and how it compares with the daily recommended allowance can't be a bad thing.

Many restaurant meals contain over 1000 calories. Add a couple of drinks and a starter or dessert and you could well be above the daily recommendation in one sitting so if it's a regular thing, you need to think about what you're eating the rest of the time, if you don't want to gain weight. Also important for takeaways and drinks.

@EsmereldaMargaretNoteSpelling

OP I suspect you're confusing BMR with TDEE. The former is your basic metabolic rate - your resting calory need, the latter is your total daily energy expenditure - your maintenance rate accounting for all activity. 1400 BMR is write right for your height but If you're quite active then your TDEE is likely to be closer to 1800.

Basal, not basic.

Yes, been saying this for years. 2000 calories is way too much for an average woman with an average, typically sedentary lifestyle. This needs to be reviewed urgently.

But taller or more active women probably burn far more than 2000 calories, so the number is just as irrelevant to them. It's fairly obvious if you're short and inactive, you won't burn as many calories as an average woman.

Plus many people will be eating more than that anyway, I know I do. Almost no-one will be seeing 2000 as a target to eat up to and then be surprised that they gain weight on that amount.

More that they lose or stay the same if they manage to stay that low.

It's not really a problem unless you don't understand what the word average means.
Though the average could probably be set a bit lower nowadays seeing as so many people are basically inactive for most of the day.

Now I’m sure there’s some (probably outdated) science behind this but at 5 ft 3 and quite active my maintain calories is 1300-1400
That seems incredibly low. If I do no exercise, only walk 5k ish, my maintenance will be 1600. With 15k steps walking fast, or a run, 40mns hiit, i'll get to 2,000.

A cycle ride and walk and I get to 2,200-2,400. I'm 5'2''