AIBU to think that guideline ‘suggested calories per day’ should be reduce

[Crepid]

We all know that the NHS guidance is that adult women should eat 2,000 calories per day and men should eat 2,500.

I’ve also just seen that a 7 year old girl is suggested to eat over 1,500 calories a day - again, the source is the NHS.

I’m 5ft 6, and have a BMI are the upper end of normal (very close to overweight) and I would say that I am probably a little overweight (fat around my abdomen and generally not as slim as I’d like but I’m on track).

In the past year I’ve taken to the gym where, combined with eating less and healthier food, I’m happy to say I’ve managed to lose about 1.5 stone (9.5kg).

For motivation, every time I attend the gym I use a new body sensor device that gives me a detailed breakdown of my stats and it clearly states that to maintain my weight and physique I should eat no more than 1,350 calories per day.

Obesity is causing a huge strain on the NHS and robbing people of their mobility and broader health.

Why are they recommending that people eat 2,000 calories per day when myself - a woman of larger than average height and medium activity levels is being told on both the gym equipment and the GP surgery machine that 1,300 calories will suffice in keeping me at the upper region of ‘healthy’ if not close to overweight?

That’s less than a 7 year old child.

AIBU to think that the calorie suggestions should be lowered to combat it?

YABU - calorie guidance should stick at 2000/2500 calories

YANBU - calorie guidance should be reviewed and lowered

Is it not your basal metabolic rate it's giving you? The machines I've used usually do that and don't ask for any information about additional activity you might do.

The machine is broken

I agree with you, the average British woman shouldn’t be eating 2,000 calories a day.

I’d prefer the complete removal of any ‘averages’ and just notification of what the food contains.

I’d also remove the nonsense ‘serving suggestions’ where they like to say one portion contains 150 calories, but on later inspection they expect the pie/cake etc to be sliced into 12.

Well done you! I totally agree. I've had a Fitbit for close to 10 years and it's been telling me that I burn 1400 calories on a non active day up to 2000 on a VERY active day, that involves about 20k steps and a hit class.

I'd love to think it's wrong but my weight gains and losses across the years have shown me that it's spot on.

If I were to take up 2000 calories a day doing moderate exercise, I'd gain 1 stone in probably 3 months!

All the calorie guidance is a complete nonsense anyway because
A) people absorb completely different amounts to others depending on their gut microbiome
B) calorie labelling on foods is very inaccurate
C) with some foods e.g nuts you will not absorb a lot of the calories with others e.g fruit juice you will
D) people's calorie requirements vary hugely e.g are they maintaining lots of muscle mass, what is their body frame size, level of activity

The NHS needs to change its healthy eating guidance to encourage people to eat less sugary carbs and more whole food sources of healthy fats, protein and high fibre. People will then naturally regulate their calorie intake.

I'm short and small framed. I definitely don't need 2000 calories on an average day.

5"6 is average height for a woman you are not tall.

I don’t know if it is though - if I ate 1950 a day I’d gain weight, and predominantly fat, like crazy.

That would be an insane amount of calories for me.

I’m by no means representative of the population but as a near average it seems odd that they’re pushing such a large calorie number

I absolutely agree, I am 5ft 7 and to keep my weight to 10 stone or less I can eat a maximum of 1300 calories a day.

I imagine that the average woman is eating far more than 2000 calories a day. I think people tend to underestimate how much they eat. I'm a few inches shorter than you and a size 6 and when I've added up my calories I tend to consume around 1800.

5ft 3 is the average for the UK. I didn’t say I was tall, I said I was taller than average

Just checked my average calorie burn per day on fitbit and it is around 1800. I am not very active, I get around 5,000 to 6,000 steps and do 30 min weights most days.

Same here. Same height and gain on anything over 1600. But the average woman weighs more in the UK, is it based on the average woman or the average healthy weight woman?

What are the credintials of the machines at the gp surgery and the gym?
Why are you keen to believe so machines rather than science backed info?

I’m 5’8”. Reasonably active. BMI 21. I eat 2,000ish to maintain. I think my official TDEE is 2,150.

But no, a one size fits all approach doesn’t work. My 5’ friend would gain weight on 2,000!

I can lose weight eating about 1800 calories a day. I maintain on about 2300. I'm short, moderately fat and fairly active. When I have tried to eat the calories suggested on Mumsnet I end up falling spectacularly off the wagon because I'm so hungry I want to chew my own arm off.

In conclusion : everyone is different.

I'd be surprised if 1300 calories wasn't your BMR rather than a maintenance figure but maybe it is for you.

Thank you!

Yes, this is exactly what I mean. I would love to think it’s wrong too but from trial and error with my food intake I’ve found that it’s actually quite accurate.

It also horrifies me when I see a fast food menu - there are more calories in most meals than what I should be eating ALL day

I recently got a fit bit and was suprised how few calories it said i got through in a day. I agree the 2000 is probably a bit high for an average woman with average activity levels.

I’d assume the ones in the GP surgery at the very least are scientifically correct 😂

I guess I’m ‘keen’ to believe it because I’ve tried varying calorie amounts out and I maintain weight on the suggested intake noted on the machine and gain weight like crazy eating the ‘recommended’ 2000 a day

How to work out what you need
https://tdeecalculator.net/result.php?s=imperial&g=female&age=35&lbs=155&in=66&act=1.375&f=1

As @Bubbles254 said, there are issues with calories. They are often up to 30% out in information and what you eat really matters. We are complex organisms that all respond a bit differently.

Same here, if I ate 2000 calories a day I would be huge.
1500 is needed for me to stay the same weight. 1700 when I do a lot of exercise.

But it depends on activity level, job (which determines activity level for most people) and metabolism! Never mind anything to do with blood sugar/insulin! If I ate 1350 calories I'd die. 2000 calories is a struggle for me and I usually average about 1800 but I am chronically underweight due to a range of factors.

If one size doesn’t fit all - which I agree by the way - shouldn’t we do away with guidelines, or bring them to healthier side of calorie intake than the unhealthier side.

I think we can safely assume that the general pop are not partaking in moderate exercise as much as they would need to be to consume those calories simply from the obesity crisis that we’re facing

Maybe a better AIBU would be for the NHS to abolish calories as a measure of food completely and teach people to eat healthily in appropriate portions by what it actually looks like on a plate.

@Bubbles254, I remember watching a programme some years ago that said the higher your heart rate the more calories you burn.

My resting heart rate is about 54 so good from a fitness perspective but not so much for calorie burning!