To think that women don't actually need 2000kcal a day

[Croissantsfordinner]

I am barely losing weight eating 1600kcal a day and most of the people I know who are slim and fit definitely do not eat 2000kcal (I am referring to family, friends, colleagues, what I read here on MN and also celebrities diet, lol). So where does this guideline come from?
Unless you are almost an athlete, I don't think all those calories are actually needed, AIBU?

I suspect a lot of people seriously underestimate just how many calories they are eating.

When I am being strict with myself I weight and measure every single thing that goes in my mouth. I’m 5ft 2 and overweight and moderately active (10,000 steps per day) - I can lose weight on 2000 cals per day. As I lose weight I expect that amount to go down but I also know it is very easy to eat more than that when I stop weighing and start eyeballing my portions and measuring my milk etc.

Isn't 2k calories a day a limit rather than a target based on your height, build, activity etc?

Me too….if I ate 2000 a day I’d balloon!

I take what my Garmin says with a large pinch of salt, and I also have no idea how many calories I eat.

That said, I think I probably do need about 2000 cals a day. If I do no proper exercise my garmin tells me I've used about 1700. An 8 mile run or a 2 hr bike ride and it'll go up to about 2500.

I am tall and slim and follow my hunger food wise. I quickly drop weight if I don't follow my hunger (which makes sense I think).

I could probably maintain on about 1500, post meno, however I've probably been eating more like the 2000 and Put on about 3 stone over the years, I now need to shift it and am aiming for less than a thousand calories a day which is actually not very much when broken down into meals, it is shifting though and when it's gone I could add a bit more but no alcohol or treats fucking miserable lol but I hate being fat so needs must.

On average according to my fitbit I burn around 2100cals a day, I think 2000 is a average, I suppose everyone is different.

I agree. I think this 2K figure must be well out of date - and refer to a time when women did more active jobs, or when they were doing more physical work in the home without so many labour-saving devices. Now nearly all of us just sit in front of a computer at work, we're really not using 2K calories each day and need to do exercise to use that amount of energy.

I would put on weight if I ate 2K a day! I try to stick to 1.5K with exercise, unless it's a special occasion.

I'm 5 ft 7 and don't have a petite build and people's height and build will have implications for calorie intake too.

Also - I think the idea that you can really eat 3 meals a day is also very optimistic if you want to keep your weight down.

Most people just don't need 3 meals - it's very largely a social convention we've all got into the habit of. Of course if you're working outside in a physical job, or you're an athlete, that's different....but that's not many women.

Surely it depends on how large those meals are? Eating at regular intervals (breakfast, lunch, dinner) is fine.

I eat little and often but if I bothered to work it out easily eat 2000 calories daily.But petite build like my mum and very active. Not sporty just walking ,gardening and had physical jobs before retirement. To eat any less Iwould be feel hungry I know. Not sure if it's metabolism but guess everyone is different and you can't generalise.

I think most people in the sendentary economy don't need many kcal. We are not dry stone wallers working in the Shetlands for 10 hours a day. Most people are Sandra in accounts having a pret coffee and croissant for breakfast and considering a KFC wrap at lunch. Personally I don't know how people can put it all away. I have a herbal tea at breakfast to stimulate my metabolism and a boiled egg or chicken thigh with some light herb sauce for lunch to avoid bloating. This is more than enough before an evening meal.

I find it depressing that lots of women can’t eat a normal, healthy diet with a few treats without worrying or trying to pretend they only nibble at lettuce leaves. We need calories and sustenance too, just like men. This nibbling at lettuce crap only serves to promote guilt and encourage women to be undernourished and feeble.

Yes, I don't disagree with you - it is indeed depressing!

But it cuts both ways - if women want to have the freedom to eat what they want they'd have to make sure they used those calories in order not to pile on the pounds.

I'm talking about a healthy physique - not a fashionable one. We know that visceral fat in particular is a threat to health.

Talking of fat - I think recent research suggests we should be more vary of carbs, especially refined carbs (my favourite food group....sob) in terms of causing glucose spikes and cholesterol formation. Animal fats in moderation are not the baddies they used to be.

I am around 50, almost 6 feet tall and have a very busy, active, and stressful live. I put on weight of I eat more than 1500 cals... envious of those who can eat more!!!

It varies, I can maintain on around 1600-2000 cals a day.

However once I began swimming three times a week my weight started to drop again in a very slow but steady way.

No change in eating habits.

There was a Sliced Bread (R4) episode a while ago about fitness trackers and by far the most incorrect value was calorie count. It is pretty much impossible to accurately calculate your calorie usage via a Smart watch.

I'm always amazed at how many MN posters count their calories - it seems so time consuming.

You are absolutely being unreasonable stating it like that. By saying “women” as we are one homogeneous thing you don’t actually realise the reality of calories. I am not even that active but my maintenance is around 2000 cals. If I start getting properly active again I can count 2400-2700 for maintenance, in which case 2000 would become more than enough of a deficit. I’ve lost weight on averaging about 2200 cals a day. But then I am tall.

I do believe the messaging around calories should become much more nuanced because there are so many variables: lifestyle, height, starting weight, body composition, etc. 2000 calories simply is an average and as individuals we have to make our own efforts to see how we fit within those averages.

One boiled egg is 'more than enough' all day?

There's a significant number of women who only care about a number on the scale/BMI chart and not in the slightest about actually getting nutrition into their body and having a skeleton and muscles strong enough to keep us mobile and safe into old age. Reading some of the comments on this thread, there is such a fear of food - a thing that sustains us and keeps us alive and healthy!

Maybe - I'm not an expert on this. But I know that, personally, I can't have 3 meals a day of any sort of normal portion and maintain a healthy weight. I'm older now, and though i'm active (lots of walking, gardening, DIY), I don't think I could cope with the sort of exercise levels which would allow me to eat 3 substantial meals a day. A banana is my breakfast when I have any. I just can't use up the calories to allow any more than that.

High days and holidays are different, of course - but I then need to lose the weight I've gained afterwards.

I'm peri meno, 5'11", reasonably active, and losing approx 2lbs a week on 1900 cals. We're all different.

It's not accurate to say women do or don't need 2000 cals a day.

If I ate 2000 calories a day, every day, I'd be fat.

I'm 41, have a large energy output (around 10 hours of hard exercise a week), and I'm 5ft4 and 9st 2.

I’m using an app set to lose 2lb per week and when I stick to it, it works. I’m 5’4” 66 years old size 14/16 and moderately active. It’s calculated I should stick to 1288 calories per day. I can have more if I exercise. I wouldn’t lose weight on 1600 cal per day

It’s an average. I know women who are 45kg and others who at 85kg and are both healthy for their frames. Obviously one needs more calories than the other.

My maintain is 1500 a day, which means my 500 deficit is 1000, its miserable. 2000 i would defintely gain again, and im still not a my goal weight, thank god for WLI making 1000 a day doable.

Depends on your lifestyle and build obviously. If you drive to work, then sit at a desk all day, you won't need 2000 cals.
I walk everywhere, have an active job and do moderate exercise 3ish times a week. I'm losing weight on 1800.
I think 2000 cals would be about right for an average women getting an adequate amount of exercise. But most of us don't.

Your metabolism and mindset is broken unless you're having a feast in the evening, and some herbal tea will not stimulate your metabolism.

We need to be eating fruit/veg/nuts/seeds for health, plus good quality protein at bear minimum of 0.75g/kg of bodyweight to maintain muscle mass. This is incredibly important for women.

7-10g of only protein and a little bit of fat at lunch (an egg/chicken wing) means your evening meal needs to include 400g of various fruit/veg, plus 30-50g minimum of quality protein and a source of calcium and healthy fats to even begin to meet nutritional requirements. Your body and brain also needs carbohydrates to stay healthy and function.

You can meet all of these requirements on relatively little calories throughout the day, but in one meal it would be huge.