Post your macros and calories

Sarasmaintaining

jim180155 wrote: »

Sarasmaintaining wrote: »

jim180155 wrote: »

Sarasmaintaining wrote: »

jacksonpt wrote: »

sixxpoint wrote: »

The difference there is that you are providing potentially harmful advice with can affect someone's long term health. It is also factually incorrect advice, not grounded in any science or logic.

I'll admit that I'm no expert, but I've done enough reading to have, what I feel is, a good handle on the basics.

Do you really think that what he's saying is actually *harmful*? You could certainly argue that some things are more or less ideal, but to go so far as to say it's harmful...?

I'm not who you're quoting but here's my little anecdotal story-a few years ago I did a vegetarian experiment and along with that I went pretty low fat (was focusing on a whole foods diet with lots of veggies, whole grains etc). A bit into it I lost my period and my hair started falling out. Went to my doctor and after going over what was happening, she nailed me on eating too little fat. Now obviously this isn't going to be the case for Jim, as far as what I experienced But, eating too low fat can definitely start to mess with your body.

I still have my period.

Oh wait, did you say hair falling out?

Lol Yeah, what I experienced isn't going to specifically be the case for you But, just be cautious with eating too low fat, that's what's I've (clumsily) been trying to get across

I know, and you're making a good point. But from what I can tell based on our posts (ignoring my first post where I said I ate 35 grams of fat per day), I'm eating about the same amount of fat that you are at around 0.45g/lb of bodyweight.

I didn't catch what your body weight was so I didn't run your numbers specifically. I was just comparing my 122lbs of girl weight to an assumption that a guy is going to weigh more than me, therefore your .45 per pound of bodyweight, would equal a higher number.

jim180155

Coming into this thread in the first place may have been a mistake. Now you guys have me watching my fat levels more than my protein levels, and some days I find myself purposely trying to get in more fat before the day's end.

The last few days I've tried dropping my protein levels to a minimum of 0.8 grams per pound of bodyweight. It's certainly easier and offers a lot more flexibility in my diet. And of course over the course of 3 days I haven't noticed any effects one way or the other on strength, hypertrophy or general well being. In the meantime I'm checking into the rationale and science behind higher protein levels. If I find more like the below, I may go back to the 1.2 grams per pound of bodyweight during my cut:

Journal of Sports Sciences
Volume 22, Issue 1, 2004
DOI:10.1080/0264041031000140554
Kevin D Tipton & Robert R Wolfe
pages 65-79
Protein and amino acids for athletes
Abstract
The main determinants of an athlete's protein needs are their training regime and habitual nutrient intake. Most athletes ingest sufficient protein in their habitual diet. Additional protein will confer only a minimal, albeit arguably important, additional advantage. Given sufficient energy intake, lean body mass can be maintained within a wide range of protein intakes. Since there is limited evidence for harmful effects of a high protein intake and there is a metabolic rationale for the efficacy of an increase in protein, if muscle hypertrophy is the goal, a higher protein intake within the context of an athlete's overall dietary requirements may be beneficial. However, there are few convincing outcome data to indicate that the ingestion of a high amount of protein (2–3 g · kg−1 BW · day−1, where BW = body weight) is necessary. Current literature suggests that it may be too simplistic to rely on recommendations of a particular amount of protein per day. Acute studies suggest that for any given amount of protein, the metabolic response is dependent on other factors, including the timing of ingestion in relation to exercise and/or other nutrients, the composition of ingested amino acids and the type of protein.


Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. 2014 Apr;24(2):127-38. doi: 10.1123/ijsnem.2013-0054. Epub 2013 Oct 2.
A systematic review of dietary protein during caloric restriction in resistance trained lean athletes: a case for higher intakes.
Abstract
Caloric restriction occurs when athletes attempt to reduce body fat or make weight. There is evidence that protein needs increase when athletes restrict calories or have low body fat.
PURPOSE:
The aims of this review were to evaluate the effects of dietary protein on body composition in energy-restricted resistance-trained athletes and to provide protein recommendations for these athletes.
METHODS:
Database searches were performed from earliest record to July 2013 using the terms protein, and intake, or diet, and weight, or train, or restrict, or energy, or strength, and athlete. Studies (N = 6) needed to use adult (≥ 18 yrs), energy-restricted, resistance-trained (> 6 months) humans of lower body fat (males ≤ 23% and females ≤ 35%) performing resistance training. Protein intake, fat free mass (FFM) and body fat had to be reported.
RESULTS:
Body fat percentage decreased (0.5-6.6%) in all study groups (N = 13) and FFM decreased (0.3-2.7kg) in nine of 13. Six groups gained, did not lose, or lost nonsignificant amounts of FFM. Five out of these six groups were among the highest in body fat, lowest in caloric restriction, or underwent novel resistance training stimuli. However, the one group that was not high in body fat that underwent substantial caloric restriction, without novel training stimuli, consumed the highest protein intake out of all the groups in this review (2.5-2.6g/kg).
CONCLUSIONS:
Protein needs for energy-restricted resistance-trained athletes are likely 2.3-3.1g/kg of FFM scaled upwards with severity of caloric restriction and leanness.


J Sports Sci. 2011;29 Suppl 1:S29-38. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2011.619204.
Dietary protein for athletes: from requirements to optimum adaptation.
Phillips SM1, Van Loon LJ.
Abstract
Opinion on the role of protein in promoting athletic performance is divided along the lines of how much aerobic-based versus resistance-based activity the athlete undertakes. Athletes seeking to gain muscle mass and strength are likely to consume higher amounts of dietary protein than their endurance-trained counterparts. The main belief behind the large quantities of dietary protein consumption in resistance-trained athletes is that it is needed to generate more muscle protein. Athletes may require protein for more than just alleviation of the risk for deficiency, inherent in the dietary guidelines, but also to aid in an elevated level of functioning and possibly adaptation to the exercise stimulus. It does appear, however, that there is a good rationale for recommending to athletes protein intakes that are higher than the RDA. Our consensus opinion is that leucine, and possibly the other branched-chain amino acids, occupy a position of prominence in stimulating muscle protein synthesis; that protein intakes in the range of 1.3-1.8 g · kg(-1) · day(-1) consumed as 3-4 isonitrogenous meals will maximize muscle protein synthesis. These recommendations may also be dependent on training status: experienced athletes would require less, while more protein should be consumed during periods of high frequency/intensity training. Elevated protein consumption, as high as 1.8-2.0 g · kg(-1) · day(-1) depending on the caloric deficit, may be advantageous in preventing lean mass losses during periods of energy restriction to promote fat loss.

That last one works out to about 0.8 grams of protein per pound of bodyweight. The other two support higher levels. And none of the three address the lower protein synthesis rates of older adults like myself. I'm going to keep looking into it. As I said earlier, there is conflicting evidence. And as stated in the first study, I don't think there is a definitive answer or guideline. Not yet, anyway.

Sarasmaintaining

jim180155 wrote: »

Coming into this thread in the first place may have been a mistake. Now you guys have me watching my fat levels more than my protein levels, and some days I find myself purposely trying to get in more fat before the day's end.

The last few days I've tried dropping my protein levels to a minimum of 0.8 grams per pound of bodyweight. It's certainly easier and offers a lot more flexibility in my diet. And of course over the course of 3 days I haven't noticed any effects one way or the other on strength, hypertrophy or general well being. In the meantime I'm checking into the rationale and science behind higher protein levels. If I find more like the below, I may go back to the 1.2 grams per pound of bodyweight during my cut:

Journal of Sports Sciences
Volume 22, Issue 1, 2004
DOI:10.1080/0264041031000140554
Kevin D Tipton & Robert R Wolfe
pages 65-79
Protein and amino acids for athletes
Abstract
The main determinants of an athlete's protein needs are their training regime and habitual nutrient intake. Most athletes ingest sufficient protein in their habitual diet. Additional protein will confer only a minimal, albeit arguably important, additional advantage. Given sufficient energy intake, lean body mass can be maintained within a wide range of protein intakes. Since there is limited evidence for harmful effects of a high protein intake and there is a metabolic rationale for the efficacy of an increase in protein, if muscle hypertrophy is the goal, a higher protein intake within the context of an athlete's overall dietary requirements may be beneficial. However, there are few convincing outcome data to indicate that the ingestion of a high amount of protein (2–3 g · kg−1 BW · day−1, where BW = body weight) is necessary. Current literature suggests that it may be too simplistic to rely on recommendations of a particular amount of protein per day. Acute studies suggest that for any given amount of protein, the metabolic response is dependent on other factors, including the timing of ingestion in relation to exercise and/or other nutrients, the composition of ingested amino acids and the type of protein.


Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. 2014 Apr;24(2):127-38. doi: 10.1123/ijsnem.2013-0054. Epub 2013 Oct 2.
A systematic review of dietary protein during caloric restriction in resistance trained lean athletes: a case for higher intakes.
Abstract
Caloric restriction occurs when athletes attempt to reduce body fat or make weight. There is evidence that protein needs increase when athletes restrict calories or have low body fat.
PURPOSE:
The aims of this review were to evaluate the effects of dietary protein on body composition in energy-restricted resistance-trained athletes and to provide protein recommendations for these athletes.
METHODS:
Database searches were performed from earliest record to July 2013 using the terms protein, and intake, or diet, and weight, or train, or restrict, or energy, or strength, and athlete. Studies (N = 6) needed to use adult (≥ 18 yrs), energy-restricted, resistance-trained (> 6 months) humans of lower body fat (males ≤ 23% and females ≤ 35%) performing resistance training. Protein intake, fat free mass (FFM) and body fat had to be reported.
RESULTS:
Body fat percentage decreased (0.5-6.6%) in all study groups (N = 13) and FFM decreased (0.3-2.7kg) in nine of 13. Six groups gained, did not lose, or lost nonsignificant amounts of FFM. Five out of these six groups were among the highest in body fat, lowest in caloric restriction, or underwent novel resistance training stimuli. However, the one group that was not high in body fat that underwent substantial caloric restriction, without novel training stimuli, consumed the highest protein intake out of all the groups in this review (2.5-2.6g/kg).
CONCLUSIONS:
Protein needs for energy-restricted resistance-trained athletes are likely 2.3-3.1g/kg of FFM scaled upwards with severity of caloric restriction and leanness.


J Sports Sci. 2011;29 Suppl 1:S29-38. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2011.619204.
Dietary protein for athletes: from requirements to optimum adaptation.
Phillips SM1, Van Loon LJ.
Abstract
Opinion on the role of protein in promoting athletic performance is divided along the lines of how much aerobic-based versus resistance-based activity the athlete undertakes. Athletes seeking to gain muscle mass and strength are likely to consume higher amounts of dietary protein than their endurance-trained counterparts. The main belief behind the large quantities of dietary protein consumption in resistance-trained athletes is that it is needed to generate more muscle protein. Athletes may require protein for more than just alleviation of the risk for deficiency, inherent in the dietary guidelines, but also to aid in an elevated level of functioning and possibly adaptation to the exercise stimulus. It does appear, however, that there is a good rationale for recommending to athletes protein intakes that are higher than the RDA. Our consensus opinion is that leucine, and possibly the other branched-chain amino acids, occupy a position of prominence in stimulating muscle protein synthesis; that protein intakes in the range of 1.3-1.8 g · kg(-1) · day(-1) consumed as 3-4 isonitrogenous meals will maximize muscle protein synthesis. These recommendations may also be dependent on training status: experienced athletes would require less, while more protein should be consumed during periods of high frequency/intensity training. Elevated protein consumption, as high as 1.8-2.0 g · kg(-1) · day(-1) depending on the caloric deficit, may be advantageous in preventing lean mass losses during periods of energy restriction to promote fat loss.

That last one works out to about 0.8 grams of protein per pound of bodyweight. The other two support higher levels. And none of the three address the lower protein synthesis rates of older adults like myself. I'm going to keep looking into it. As I said earlier, there is conflicting evidence. And as stated in the first study, I don't think there is a definitive answer or guideline. Not yet, anyway.

I applaud your willingness to explore the issue further-I need to as well, since I'm still very new to this whole macros thing