Who is that "average woman" who needs to eat 2,000 cal?

rowrunyoga

@ Hildy:

"It's like winning the lottery and them asking: 'Do you want half the money or all of it'?
:laugh:

Word, sister!
I was all, "let's get this DONE!"

Until I realized what a grump 1200 calories made me.

Cranquistador

<

---

This girl! MFP gave me a 1200 calorie goal and I LOL'd.
I eat 1800-2400 depending on my activity level. And I'm losing weight.
:happy:

What did you put in for your desired goal? 2 pound a week loss? MFP starts most women at 1200 calories for that reason.

What else are people going to put in? :bigsmile:

It's like winning the lottery and them asking: 'Do you want half the money or all of it'?.

I don't understand what you are trying to say

pfgaytriot

I'm that average woman. I'm 5'2" and my TDEE is around 2024, so that's what aim to consume on my non-workout days. On days that I workout, I eat more.

Francl27

I'm guessing they just base that on average height (5'5"?), average age (maybe 30?), with at least a bit of activity. Entering that in a TDEE calculator I get close to 2000.

The key is 'average'. A sedentary person isn't really average, IMO (well, or at least shouldn't be).

I've calculated that my TDEE at goal weight if sedentary will be 1650. I can deal with that, couple walks here and there and some workouts and I can probably get it close to 2000.

professorRAT

There is lots of evidence in this thread that many people have no idea what "average" means. This makes me sad.

lilawolf

I'm 5'9, 145lbs, and my maintenance calories with lifting 3 days a week and martial arts 2 days a week is about 2350. Same if I am walking and running at lunch and on weekends. The "average woman" is shorter but weighs more than me. It definitely depends on activity level.

SrJoben

What is this I don't even...next people will be crying foul because we don't all actually have 2.2 kids and 1.5 cats.

LEARN WHAT AVERAGE MEANS.

Hildy_J

You speak with confidence as if you're some kind of expert, when you're just another mindless one who reads an article and instantly believes you're an expert and have the right to talk down to others.
Many women and men fail at their diets following stupid averages based on flawed studies rather than just gauging their caloric needs on a personal basis.

I trust reliable sources such as the UK National Health Service on health matters - until their results are disproven. Which happens, btw - sixty years ago UK doctors thought smoking was beneficial to health.
There is a body of learning behind these institutions which goes back centuries. What on earth would be the point of going round reinventing the wheel on every piece of information?
I also find scientific sources to be far more reliable than any other sort and prefer fact to opinion.

I can see you're one of these women who see "900 calories burned" on a 30 minute elliptical machine session and actually believe that it's accurate.

??? I hate exercise. Never do it. Also what the hell is an 'eliptical' machine? Actually don't bother telling me... it sounds like torture.

87monkey

For my goal weight my daily calorie intake for being slightly active (light exercise one-three times a week) is a little over 2000 calories. Being moderately active (moderate exercise three-five) times a week is around 2200 calories.

professorRAT

What is this I don't even...next people will be crying foul because we don't all actually have 2.2 kids and 1.5 cats.

LEARN WHAT AVERAGE MEANS.

:flowerforyou:

PikaKnight

There is lots of evidence in this thread that many people have no idea what "average" means. This makes me sad.

QFT

Glad someone finally said it

SailorKnightWing

And here's some history on the subject:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reference_Daily_Intake

NRSPAM

Typically, "most women" supposedly burn around 2,000. That's not including exercise. When you add muscle to the equasion, the burn will be higher, since muscle burns calories. Don't know how much higher, but I lose at around 1,800/day. My BMR is 1,490, which is at rest, which I usually am not. I burn around 2,500-3,000/day, depending on how much exercise I do. One day I was sick, and laid around most of the day, and still burned 1,900. I have a bodymedia that tells me what I burn daily. I'm 5' 3.5" and 150lb's.

Fullsterkur_woman

What did you put in for your desired goal? 2 pound a week loss? MFP starts most women at 1200 calories for that reason.

What else are people going to put in? :bigsmile:

It's like winning the lottery and them asking: 'Do you want half the money or all of it'?.

I think it's more like them asking "Do you want all the money right now and get taxed more heavily on it, or do you want a little bit at a time and lose less to taxes?" You still get "all" the money eventually (inasmuch as some of it gets lost to taxes no matter what).

Well, of course I would like to lose all of the fat instantly, but I also know that the deficit required to lose 2 pounds a week is not sustainable for most people. Historically, I've always been a 1/2 - 1 pound a week person, so I put that.

I'd take Option B in the lottery scenario too, BTW, but then I am pretty risk-averse. Which is why I would never find myself in the lottery scenario, because buying a lottery ticket is like wadding up your money, throwing it in the toilet and flushing, but I digress...

heybales

So they are assuming that average woman and average man exercise almost every day?

You seen the average overweight status of people?

Include that in your math too. Not 2000 calories at healthy weight, current weight 2000 calories with current low/no exercise.

If they are talking healthy weight, they also usually seem to be talking about a healthy amount of exercise.

So about 2000 either way.

But you also need to factor in what is the average height, as height is big influence on metabolism and therefore TDEE.

LoraF83

What did you put in for your desired goal? 2 pound a week loss? MFP starts most women at 1200 calories for that reason.

What else are people going to put in? :bigsmile:

It's like winning the lottery and them asking: 'Do you want half the money or all of it'?.

I think it's more like them asking "Do you want all the money right now and get taxed more heavily on it, or do you want a little bit at a time and lose less to taxes?" You still get "all" the money eventually (inasmuch as some of it gets lost to taxes no matter what).

Well, of course I would like to lose all of the fat instantly, but I also know that the deficit required to lose 2 pounds a week is not sustainable for most people. Historically, I've always been a 1/2 - 1 pound a week person, so I put that.

I'd take Option B in the lottery scenario too, BTW, but then I am pretty risk-averse. Which is why I would never find myself in the lottery scenario, because buying a lottery ticket is like wadding up your money, throwing it in the toilet and flushing, but I digress...

geekyjock76

If you check online medical journals, such as The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Medicine, you can peruse the countless studies which take baseline TDEE measurements. Upon review, you'll notice that there are quite a lot of women of various ages, weight and activity levels with energy needs 2000+.

People in general tend to underestimate their maintenance energy needs in both pre and post-fat loss. But I think some women do so as a result of negatively associating a higher TDEE with the only context being higher weight. This isn't at all surprising considering how many women respond to scale weight as it relates to their sense of esteem and self-worth.

GemmaRowlands

I maintain on around 1,600 cals, but I have a very sedentary lifestyle due to my job (I work as a writer/proofreader from home), so if I exercised properly I wouldn't be too far off 2,000.

Hildy_J

What did you put in for your desired goal? 2 pound a week loss? MFP starts most women at 1200 calories for that reason.

What else are people going to put in? :bigsmile:

It's like winning the lottery and them asking: 'Do you want half the money or all of it'?.

I think it's more like them asking "Do you want all the money right now and get taxed more heavily on it, or do you want a little bit at a time and lose less to taxes?" You still get "all" the money eventually (inasmuch as some of it gets lost to taxes no matter what).

Well, of course I would like to lose all of the fat instantly, but I also know that the deficit required to lose 2 pounds a week is not sustainable for most people. Historically, I've always been a 1/2 - 1 pound a week person, so I put that.

I'd take Option B in the lottery scenario too, BTW, but then I am pretty risk-averse. Which is why I would never find myself in the lottery scenario, because buying a lottery ticket is like wadding up your money, throwing it in the toilet and flushing, but I digress...

Yeah and they ALSO don't tell you when you take the 'all the money' option that not only are you going to be taxed heavily but you're going to be really hungry, exhausted, emotional and craving a Snickers binge by the end of the first week. :sad:

SuperCrsa

Bump to read later..