The 4000 calorie vs 2000 calorie argument...:)

Oo_BrookeNicole_oO
Oo_BrookeNicole_oO Posts: 165
in Health and Weight Loss
I was talking to a friend about fitness, and he argued me up and down that 4000 calories is the "right" number of calories to eat in a day. I told him I believed a healthy amount for someone not trying to lose weight is around 2000. He acted like I was crazy, and said that eating 2000 would be starving yourself.

Now I agree that if you're highly active you can get by with eating 4000, but I believe for most people that is just to much.

He'd probably have a cow if he found out I was eating 1400. :P What do you think about this "factual information?"
«13

Replies

  • TheNewDodge
    TheNewDodge Posts: 607 Member
    Everybody is different.
  • Actually_Mike
    Actually_Mike Posts: 61 Member
    The only time I've seen 4000 + calorie diet is in professional athletes, I read somewhere on NBA website once about diets that some players burn up to 5 lbs in just one game, that's why they consume so many calories, I guess it depends on what they're doing. I'm pretty sure Michael Phelps eats like 12,000 a day!
  • UponThisRock
    UponThisRock Posts: 4,519 Member
    Of course, there's no such thing as the "right" amount of calories, you're much closer to being right than he is.
  • MikeSEA
    MikeSEA Posts: 1,074 Member
    Umm...my 15 year old nephew who's 6'3", 225lbs, and trains for sports 5 days/week probably eats 4k+ calories in a day. *I* on the other hand only burn about 3k calories, and that's only if I'm working out that day. So 2k doesn't sound unreasonable to me :)
  • engineman312
    engineman312 Posts: 3,450 Member
    Of course, there's no such thing as the "right" amount of calories, you're much closer to being right than he is.

    so you're saying she is a unique and beautiful snowflake??
  • love4fitnesslove4food_wechange
    love4fitnesslove4food_wechange Posts: 6,897 Member
    there is a range of "right" and varies by person, bf%, activity level, age, etc.
  • IronSmasher
    IronSmasher Posts: 3,908 Member
    Well they're equally right/wrong.

    Centuries of study and research undone by people plucking figures out of thin air and applying them to 7 billion individuals with different bodies, lives and goals.
  • Oo_BrookeNicole_oO
    Oo_BrookeNicole_oO Posts: 165
    Well they're equally right/wrong.

    Centuries of study and research undone by people plucking figures out of thin air and applying them to 7 billion individuals with different bodies, lives and goals.

    Oh yes, I know that no certain amount of calories is right for everyone. I understand some people really do need to have 4000 plus calories a day for various reasons. I just think for sedentary- lightly active people the 4000 range would be to much if sustained over a long period of time.
  • stubbysticks
    stubbysticks Posts: 1,275 Member
    for sedentary- lightly active people the 4000 range would be to much if sustained over a long period of time.
    Depends on your starting weight. If you're over 400 lbs for example, you could conceivably lose weight at 4k calories a day for quite a long period of time.
  • IronSmasher
    IronSmasher Posts: 3,908 Member
    Well 2k would be too much for the majority of people, taking into account the elderly, children and assuming 50% are female.

    I think it's just best you don't talk to him about fitness or diet anymore.
  • treetop57
    treetop57 Posts: 1,578 Member
    Nutrition labels on American food products are designed for a 2,000 calorie diet. While everyone is a unique snowflake, the average adult American snowflake has a daily food requirement of about 2,000 calories.

    ucm063353.gif
    Percent Daily Values are based on a 2,000 calorie diet. Your daily values may be higher or lower depending on your calorie needs: . . .

    http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/GuidanceDocuments/FoodLabelingNutrition/ucm063113.htm
  • umachanxo
    umachanxo Posts: 926 Member
    I eat 1350, he'd probably have a stroke if he knew that. But I can see someone who is a pro athlete needing that many a day. Depends on the person and their body.
  • AeolianHarp
    AeolianHarp Posts: 463 Member
    Both of you are wrong.
  • Oo_BrookeNicole_oO
    Oo_BrookeNicole_oO Posts: 165
    Of course, there's no such thing as the "right" amount of calories, you're much closer to being right than he is.

    so you're saying she is a unique and beautiful snowflake??


    Nope, I'm not at all. I'm just an ordinary kind of girl with a measly opinion. One that may be right or wrong! :)
  • aippolito1
    aippolito1 Posts: 4,894 Member
    2000 is considered for an athlete maintaining their weight. So yeah, 4000 is ridiculous. My maintenance will probably be close to 2000 since when I workout, I eat about 1800-1900 calories. But that's before exercise calories (the 2000 for maintenance).

    My base is 1530 and then I typically burn about 400-450 calories per day. Hope this helps you win your argument, lol!
  • BrettPGH
    BrettPGH Posts: 4,716 Member
    I spent a long time eating 4000 calories. I had to come here to fix that.
  • Oo_BrookeNicole_oO
    Oo_BrookeNicole_oO Posts: 165
    for sedentary- lightly active people the 4000 range would be to much if sustained over a long period of time.
    Depends on your starting weight. If you're over 400 lbs for example, you could conceivably lose weight at 4k calories a day for quite a long period of time.

    True! I didn't think about that! Thanks. :)
  • ajwade123
    ajwade123 Posts: 1 Member
    Everybody is different, but 2000 is the average. I don't think there is any way for someone to eat 4000 cal a day without gaining weight. All food labeling is based on a 2000 cal/day diet.
  • thelovelyLIZ
    thelovelyLIZ Posts: 1,227 Member
    I would gain weight like crazy if I ate 4000 a day. I'm a small person, so on a day when I don't work out even 2000 is pushing it (1800 is better for me I think).

    Sure, if you're bigger, have a lot of muscle, or are really active 4000 is fine, but for most people that's way too much. It seems like he just arbitrarily picked a number.
  • ChitownFoodie
    ChitownFoodie Posts: 1,562 Member
    Depends on the person. Personally, I eat about 2,100 calories a day, but I am sure there are people out there that need more calories.
  • rml_16
    rml_16 Posts: 16,414 Member
    I would weigh 500 pounds if I ate that much. Plus, it would be very difficult for me to eat that much food!
  • Anthonydaman
    Anthonydaman Posts: 854 Member
    There is 3500 calories in one pound of body fat, 4000 is ridiculous. 2000 is more appropriate for a active person.
  • CosmicBella
    CosmicBella Posts: 195 Member
    I spent a long time eating 4000 calories. I had to come here to fix that.

    LOL... Me too!
  • tameko2
    tameko2 Posts: 31,634 Member
    *sigh*

    For a large active person with lots of muscle, 2k would be totally insufficient. For a totally inactive small person with low muscle and high fat 2000 would be weight gain territory.

    4k is not ridiculous. if I could figure out a way to pay my mortgage without sitting at a computer 8 hours a day I could totally eat 3k and not gain weight. My husband is 8 inches taller than me (6'2"), if he had my muscle mass *Rawr* and wasn't so inactive he could easily eat 4k and not gain.

    *edit* PS: I think you are more right than him, on average I think most people come out to maintaining around 1800-2500 calories a day.
  • Cindy311
    Cindy311 Posts: 780 Member
    Wish I could eat 4000 calories a day...grr, lol! Again, though, like others have said people vary so much in their caloric needs. I top out around between 1800-2000 a day and I guess it's an okay amount for me. I see your point though and I don't know why a sedentary adult would need 4,000 cals a day, that seems like a huge amount for average people that really have no physical activity :-/
  • Quasita
    Quasita Posts: 1,530 Member
    Well they're equally right/wrong.

    Centuries of study and research undone by people plucking figures out of thin air and applying them to 7 billion individuals with different bodies, lives and goals.

    Oh yes, I know that no certain amount of calories is right for everyone. I understand some people really do need to have 4000 plus calories a day for various reasons. I just think for sedentary- lightly active people the 4000 range would be to much if sustained over a long period of time.

    Not necessarily. My starting BMR was just under 4k because of my height and weight. Now my resting, no work out days still burn around 3300.
  • teeley
    teeley Posts: 477 Member
    The only time I've seen 4000 + calorie diet is in professional athletes, I read somewhere on NBA website once about diets that some players burn up to 5 lbs in just one game, that's why they consume so many calories, I guess it depends on what they're doing. I'm pretty sure Michael Phelps eats like 12,000 a day!

    Michael Phelps eats 12,000 because he's high
  • IronSmasher
    IronSmasher Posts: 3,908 Member
    I'm 6'3, 220lb, and today I ate 4213kcal, and was under my calorie goal.
  • keiraev
    keiraev Posts: 695 Member
    The "average" woman is meant to consume 2000 a day (including all activity - and on an active day I definitely eat that)

    The "average" man can eat 2500-3000 and not gain weight.

    4000 for most, is a surplus.
  • BrettPGH
    BrettPGH Posts: 4,716 Member
    Michael Phelps eats 12,000 because he's high

    Did the same plan, minus the swimming.

Categories