2000 calories???

Post Reply New Topic

It's common knowledge that the average person needs 2,000 calories a day. I'm wondering if that really means "what most people think of as 2,000 calories." It's easy to underestimate calories, and as an eating disorder survivor, I have measured portions meticulously--2,000 calories a day is a *lot* less than you'd think. I lost 5 pounds in a month when I ate 2,000 calories. Is this a myth or something?

Hmm, that's strange, I seem to be the opposite. I think I gain weight if I eat over about 1200. :s

How many calories a person needs is based on body type, how much running, walking etc.
Some one with more muscles needs more. Someone who walks alot needs more.
You use 50 percent only sitting not doing much. If you lost 5 pounds that means you needed
to eat more than 2k per day.

The notion that "2,000 calories is enough for everyone", is 1980/1990s BS, together with the notion that you should eat as much fiber as possible and the notion that only 10% of your calories should come from protein.

A 180 pound man, unless he lives a very sedentary life, will lose a lot of testosterone, lose muscle mass, and will generally impair his health if he just eats 2,000 calories per day. People tend to underestimate how much they eat by about 30%.

I think that I gain weight when I eat more than 200 calories. When I work out on my exercise bike for 20 minutes, I lose around 200 calories. So I have to absolutely not eat anything over that amount or I'll stay obese or put on weight. Yes, I know doing other things also burn calories but not nearly as much unless its something that will put me on the verge of collapsing like pedaling for more than 20 minutes on my bike. You how snakes can swallow their prey and then not eat for weeks on end? That's basically how my own body works, so I am going to have to go without eating myself no matter what, even if it's really unhealthy. I don't feel hungry most of the time anyway.

You mean 2,000 calories a day, right? 200 is nothing, holocaust victims had about 700 a day and they starved to death.

like said it's all based on body, weight, activity level, age and genetics etc etc - metabolism and such. That's kind of what you see as just the broad general basis on nutrition labels right? "% based on a 2,000 calorie diet"

Still very generalized but for an averagely active person you go for 10x - 11 your body weight,. If you weigh 150, go for about 1500ish calories. And of course it depends on where those calories come from, when you eat and the likes. (hitting 1500 with 10 candy bars is obviously going to produce different results than doing that with a balanced diet of carbs, fats and proteins hehe)

If you got a smart phone get myfitnesspal and start using it, i've been using a food tracker for a few years now, i'm all about micromanagement and statistics so it's fun for me and hopefully for a lot of people here. It's interesting once you get to about 6+ months of data and can really start to analyze and see where you're at, what your metabolism is like and changing it up and seeing actual results and you'll get a good idea what your body type is like.

I didn't know this. That's interesting.

I'm pretty leery of that number, too, but I assumed it was a "me" thing.

Two thousand a day doesn't work for me unless I eat low-fat, no condiments, cooked-at-home food. I need baked chicken thighs and drumsticks, cooked carrots, eggs and toast for breakfast, a glass of milk, a banana, baked potatoes with butter, roasted vegetable medleys, cheese on crackers, baked salmon, eggrolls...

Running a meal's worth of healthy food through Google for calories, around 500-ish is one meal of something like a salmon fillet and some cooked vegetables. Pretty light, and that's without condiments as far as I can tell. I'd be hungry fairly soon after in most cases, and I'd starve on salads and diet portions. Heaven forbid I ever have snacks or eat out when I'm aiming for 2,000 a day.

Women need less. Sedentary people need less. The elderly need less. Teenage boys need more.

^on average.
Some days you'll eat more some days you'll eat less.

It's easy to find calorie-counting software or apps for a smartphone; you can track what you eat for a week, including exercise, and figure out how much you're averaging per day, and figure out if you've gained or lost anything for the week with a scale. By the end of a month you should have a pretty good idea of how many calories you need, and how much to increase it based on exercise.

I don't think whether someone feels hungry is a good indicator of whether they eat too much or too little. Overweight people are often hungry too, and obviously they don't need more food.

I do hope you are speaking of weight loss, as very few people would need to keep their intake as low as 1500 to maintain weight and in fact, I know plenty of women on myfitnesspal who lose weight eating over 1500 calories if they workout as well. I personally, lost weight while weighing less than 140 Ibs, eating anything up to 2600 calories, counting in my exercise regime and general daily activity. Sedentary, I lose weight on 1700 calories. In many cases, people attempt to lose weight on a lot less than they should be eating and in so doing, reduce their metabolisms and leave themselves nowhere to go down to if they stall out.

2000 a day to maintain is aimed at the lightly active female. Males are meant to have around 2500, but it varies wildly depending on activity level and body composition. Even height makes a difference. A taller person can generally get away with eating more than someone who is, say, 5'.

This is not correct. The average woman on a 2000-Kcal/day diet will gain weight, especially if she is minimally active. Smaller women can maintain weight at 1200 kcal/day if they're not active.
http://www.lisajohnsonfitness.com/who-b ... -big-agra/
http://www.weightymatters.ca/2012/07/is ... -diet.html

Well, I must know an awful lot of outliers, myself included. I know many women who are only 5'2 who are LOSING weight on a higher intake than 1200 calories. And they are certainly not elite athletes. I myself am not that active, nor that heavy, and maintain on 2000-2200 calories a day.

Also note, I said 'lightly active' not 'minimally active'. You seem to have totally overlooked the little bit I added about it varying wildly depending on activity level and body composition, which is actually also what those articles you linked to are inferring. I did not say ALL women maintain at 2000. Age, weight, height, medical conditions, activity levels, are always going to be something that will impact that number. But to me, someone who is lightly active, meaning they are not sat on their bottom all day at a desk and actually spend some time moving about, will maintain on around 2000 calories. I have yet to come across any study that proves that 'The average woman on a 2000-Kcak/day diet will gain weight'.

Don't forget about environmental temperature. A large part of energy is used to keep body temperature, I think it makes sense that if you live in a warmer climate/house you will use much fewer calories just doing nothing. Some people turn the heat down to 15C and still find that comfortable, they will use more calories than people who keep a normal room temperature.

I would gain weight with that intake at my height and weight