Recomposition: Maintaining weight while losing fat
Replies
-
richiechowns wrote: »richiechowns wrote: »richiechowns wrote: »Nacho_Daddy wrote: »richiechowns wrote: »Bookmarked, lots to go through.
Can anyone link me to how this work if you have changeable exercise patterns please? For example, I don't go to the gym and follow a weights program as such, I run and do differing distances and intensity some days, others I'll do a T25 type HIIT/weights type program, others I'll do body weight training.
Is it a case of setting your activity levels as a week view, rather than a day view? I work on my backside around 8 hours a day, I do get up and walk a bit but most of the time it is early exercise and then later walking, cycling or running.
What works for me is to not use MFP's somewhat arbitrary "Active / Inactive" type of activity setting, and instead work directly with actual logged activity. By setting your MFP Activity Level to Sedentary, MFP won't load caloric expenditure into your days unless YOU log calories burned. To me, this keeps the whole thing 'honest' and then your caloric burns will guide the "Calories out" portion of your CI=CO equation, rather than having MFP pre-load some calorie number into that equation for me so my daily energy output (logged) is calculated into the "eat these calories" calculation displayed here on MFP.
Again, that's how I make it work, but as @usmcmp says " The only way to know for sure is to monitor your weight and calories over time while adjusting calories when you have an up or down trend. " (emphasis on trend)
Just so I understand this, you set your calories to maintenance based on estimated TDEE, then set activity to Sedentary, then (I use Garmin) log everything you do, such as walking and running, lifting etc to get the proper adjustments?
You don't have to log anything though since the Garmin is already picking it up.
And if syncing an activity tracker - it's reporting TDEE to MFP already, MFP corrects itself to that figure, and then figures your eating goal.
So no need to manually adjust anything on MFP for eating goal.
Set MFP to maintain, activity level to Sedentary or Not active as app calls it now - and Garmin will send over workouts logged, and daily burn figure.
MFP will do the math, and you should be able to observe your eating goal at end of day is what Garmin said you burned TDEE.
Done.
Adjust as needed - Garmin will inflate calorie burn for some things like lifting possibly. But daily distance walking activity is likely fine - unless you do a ton of steps and the stride length is off decent amount.
Notice issues like correcting a workout on Garmin for calories doesn't seem to push the change through.
And even on Garmin it takes awhile for their TDEE value to change after you make a correction like that, anything correcting down especially.
So just to throw something else into the mix, Garmin has 8 levels of activity I think, what do I set that to?
I did do a mile counting strides, I may have lost count a few times...
That is used in calculating calorie burn from workouts when HR is used.
So be honest with it.
That's all that is used for. And some devices don't even use the FirstBeat technology as Garmin has to pay them for use.
As to steps - if you start a workout on the device, it'll count the steps. But you have to walk a trustworthy 1 mile to confirm it's right or wrong.
And for it to dynamically adjust up or down the distance of each stride impact correctly - walk 2 mph, which is usually mid-point grocery store shuffle to exercise pace.
So if you can find that past workout where you walked a track or such @ 2 mph, maybe a treadmill though they aren't always calibrated as often as they should be - you should be able to get a step count for that workout.
Now that I think about it - Garmin has made some changes - I'm hoping you can look or make a walking workout and display the steps they saw.
Then from there, the device user settings for steps in the 5280 ft.
It was a race mile, so it was marked start to finish and a straight line, I'm pretty sure I was okay and didn't lost count but next time I attempt it I'll use a 400m track. The only issue I had was the 2mph bit, I cannot naturally walk that slow, but then it only wanted me to input number of strides and distance anyway and time/speed was captured for the workout.
So into the weeds here.
These step tracking devices are looking at impacts compared to known weight and stride length to dynamically adjust what the current stride distance must have been.
The farther it has to adjust - the less accurate. From good distance and time come very accurate calorie burn.
If stride length is set for race pace - then it's good for how much distance in your day, how much of your daily calorie burn?
Whereas everything on other side of range is most likely inflated, that side that is usually the majority of the day and calorie burn is least accurate.
It's a simple tweak, but if you get lots of daily steps can be meaningful. You probably walk 2 mph more often then you know, doing daily stuff, it's just we don't do many steps at that pace.3 -
richiechowns wrote: »richiechowns wrote: »richiechowns wrote: »Nacho_Daddy wrote: »richiechowns wrote: »Bookmarked, lots to go through.
Can anyone link me to how this work if you have changeable exercise patterns please? For example, I don't go to the gym and follow a weights program as such, I run and do differing distances and intensity some days, others I'll do a T25 type HIIT/weights type program, others I'll do body weight training.
Is it a case of setting your activity levels as a week view, rather than a day view? I work on my backside around 8 hours a day, I do get up and walk a bit but most of the time it is early exercise and then later walking, cycling or running.
What works for me is to not use MFP's somewhat arbitrary "Active / Inactive" type of activity setting, and instead work directly with actual logged activity. By setting your MFP Activity Level to Sedentary, MFP won't load caloric expenditure into your days unless YOU log calories burned. To me, this keeps the whole thing 'honest' and then your caloric burns will guide the "Calories out" portion of your CI=CO equation, rather than having MFP pre-load some calorie number into that equation for me so my daily energy output (logged) is calculated into the "eat these calories" calculation displayed here on MFP.
Again, that's how I make it work, but as @usmcmp says " The only way to know for sure is to monitor your weight and calories over time while adjusting calories when you have an up or down trend. " (emphasis on trend)
Just so I understand this, you set your calories to maintenance based on estimated TDEE, then set activity to Sedentary, then (I use Garmin) log everything you do, such as walking and running, lifting etc to get the proper adjustments?
You don't have to log anything though since the Garmin is already picking it up.
And if syncing an activity tracker - it's reporting TDEE to MFP already, MFP corrects itself to that figure, and then figures your eating goal.
So no need to manually adjust anything on MFP for eating goal.
Set MFP to maintain, activity level to Sedentary or Not active as app calls it now - and Garmin will send over workouts logged, and daily burn figure.
MFP will do the math, and you should be able to observe your eating goal at end of day is what Garmin said you burned TDEE.
Done.
Adjust as needed - Garmin will inflate calorie burn for some things like lifting possibly. But daily distance walking activity is likely fine - unless you do a ton of steps and the stride length is off decent amount.
Notice issues like correcting a workout on Garmin for calories doesn't seem to push the change through.
And even on Garmin it takes awhile for their TDEE value to change after you make a correction like that, anything correcting down especially.
So just to throw something else into the mix, Garmin has 8 levels of activity I think, what do I set that to?
I did do a mile counting strides, I may have lost count a few times...
That is used in calculating calorie burn from workouts when HR is used.
So be honest with it.
That's all that is used for. And some devices don't even use the FirstBeat technology as Garmin has to pay them for use.
As to steps - if you start a workout on the device, it'll count the steps. But you have to walk a trustworthy 1 mile to confirm it's right or wrong.
And for it to dynamically adjust up or down the distance of each stride impact correctly - walk 2 mph, which is usually mid-point grocery store shuffle to exercise pace.
So if you can find that past workout where you walked a track or such @ 2 mph, maybe a treadmill though they aren't always calibrated as often as they should be - you should be able to get a step count for that workout.
Now that I think about it - Garmin has made some changes - I'm hoping you can look or make a walking workout and display the steps they saw.
Then from there, the device user settings for steps in the 5280 ft.
It was a race mile, so it was marked start to finish and a straight line, I'm pretty sure I was okay and didn't lost count but next time I attempt it I'll use a 400m track. The only issue I had was the 2mph bit, I cannot naturally walk that slow, but then it only wanted me to input number of strides and distance anyway and time/speed was captured for the workout.
So into the weeds here.
These step tracking devices are looking at impacts compared to known weight and stride length to dynamically adjust what the current stride distance must have been.
The farther it has to adjust - the less accurate. From good distance and time come very accurate calorie burn.
If stride length is set for race pace - then it's good for how much distance in your day, how much of your daily calorie burn?
Whereas everything on other side of range is most likely inflated, that side that is usually the majority of the day and calorie burn is least accurate.
It's a simple tweak, but if you get lots of daily steps can be meaningful. You probably walk 2 mph more often then you know, doing daily stuff, it's just we don't do many steps at that pace.
Sorry that wasn't clear from me, the mile is a measured mile to the UKA standard but I didn't run that mile, I walked at my natural pace.
I could try it again but would have to be shorter distance or with a metronome counting at a 2mph speed, I find it hard to walk 2mph.0 -
richiechowns wrote: »Bookmarked, lots to go through.
Can anyone link me to how this work if you have changeable exercise patterns please? For example, I don't go to the gym and follow a weights program as such, I run and do differing distances and intensity some days, others I'll do a T25 type HIIT/weights type program, others I'll do body weight training.
Is it a case of setting your activity levels as a week view, rather than a day view? I work on my backside around 8 hours a day, I do get up and walk a bit but most of the time it is early exercise and then later walking, cycling or running.
I don't use a Fitbit or Garmin. I just listen to my body. I set it at seditary. Aim just above my BMR and pay close attention to muscle soreness and increase protein and calories until I lose fat and maintain muscle at the same time. calipers showing bf reduction and tape showing same size. scale may stay the same or slightly drop.
Worked for me2 -
I've recently turned off exercise calories and I'm working on getting my calorie goal through MFP to match my actual maintenance by modifying activity level. I was just finding planning my meals so tough when I was seeing sometimes half of my calories added through activity through out the day.0
-
I've recently turned off exercise calories and I'm working on getting my calorie goal through MFP to match my actual maintenance by modifying activity level. I was just finding planning my meals so tough when I was seeing sometimes half of my calories added through activity through out the day.
That's a decent plan if you already know your numbers, trying to find which of 4 levels makes the same number.
At that point, likely only 2 levels are high enough.
You could also just manually create an eating goal that is exactly the number you found for avg maintenance.
Is there a reason why you want to only use the activity level to adjust the eating level?1 -
Sorry for all the questions, early days.
Reference lifting, I don't lift as such, other than my body weight, is that detrimental to recomp.
And I'm also vegan, so just need to work out the best way to set my macros for protein then eat enough without relying on shakes abs blocks of tempeh.1 -
richiechowns wrote: »Sorry for all the questions, early days.
Reference lifting, I don't lift as such, other than my body weight, is that detrimental to recomp.
And I'm also vegan, so just need to work out the best way to set my macros for protein then eat enough without relying on shakes abs blocks of tempeh.
The concept of recomp is to build muscle while reducing body fat. Building muscle requires some kind of progressive resistance. Some people are able to achieve that with body weight exercise, although I wouldn't call it optimum.
As I understand you goals, you want to to lean down, be generally fit with a focus more on cardio exercises, yes? You are doing some body weight stuff for general fitness? Do you still have about 20(?) lbs of body fat that you want to reduce?2 -
richiechowns wrote: »Sorry for all the questions, early days.
Reference lifting, I don't lift as such, other than my body weight, is that detrimental to recomp.
And I'm also vegan, so just need to work out the best way to set my macros for protein then eat enough without relying on shakes abs blocks of tempeh.
Well, for your body to feel the need to use more of the energy you intake to build muscle, and therefore use more of the stored fat for daily use - there needs to be a reason to build more muscle.
Endurance movements like cardio isn't doing that really.
So long as your body weight resistance exercise is pushing a progressive load, constantly asking the muscles to do more, and body building more of them to handle that load - then that is fine.3 -
richiechowns wrote: »Sorry for all the questions, early days.
Reference lifting, I don't lift as such, other than my body weight, is that detrimental to recomp.
And I'm also vegan, so just need to work out the best way to set my macros for protein then eat enough without relying on shakes abs blocks of tempeh.
The concept of recomp is to build muscle while reducing body fat. Building muscle requires some kind of progressive resistance. Some people are able to achieve that with body weight exercise, although I wouldn't call it optimum.
As I understand you goals, you want to to lean down, be generally fit with a focus more on cardio exercises, yes? You are doing some body weight stuff for general fitness? Do you still have about 20(?) lbs of body fat that you want to reduce?
My goal is to be stronger, so simply at this moment in time I'm working on pull up and dips etc, to gain enough strength to do those.
I've seen distance runners, some faster and older than me with better strength and definition. I'm 5 foot 11 and weight 69kg, so I'd say less than 20lbs of body fat to reduce.1 -
richiechowns wrote: »richiechowns wrote: »Sorry for all the questions, early days.
Reference lifting, I don't lift as such, other than my body weight, is that detrimental to recomp.
And I'm also vegan, so just need to work out the best way to set my macros for protein then eat enough without relying on shakes abs blocks of tempeh.
The concept of recomp is to build muscle while reducing body fat. Building muscle requires some kind of progressive resistance. Some people are able to achieve that with body weight exercise, although I wouldn't call it optimum.
As I understand you goals, you want to to lean down, be generally fit with a focus more on cardio exercises, yes? You are doing some body weight stuff for general fitness? Do you still have about 20(?) lbs of body fat that you want to reduce?
My goal is to be stronger, so simply at this moment in time I'm working on pull up and dips etc, to gain enough strength to do those.
I've seen distance runners, some faster and older than me with better strength and definition. I'm 5 foot 11 and weight 69kg, so I'd say less than 20lbs of body fat to reduce.
Hard to say if or for how long that kind of routine would help with recomp. You might want to consider a slight, maybe 200 to 300 calorie, deficit. This will help you lean down slowly and help with maintaining muscle mass to get the definition you are looking for.
ETA: at you height and weight, I'd be surprised you have any fat to lose.1 -
richiechowns wrote: »richiechowns wrote: »Sorry for all the questions, early days.
Reference lifting, I don't lift as such, other than my body weight, is that detrimental to recomp.
And I'm also vegan, so just need to work out the best way to set my macros for protein then eat enough without relying on shakes abs blocks of tempeh.
The concept of recomp is to build muscle while reducing body fat. Building muscle requires some kind of progressive resistance. Some people are able to achieve that with body weight exercise, although I wouldn't call it optimum.
As I understand you goals, you want to to lean down, be generally fit with a focus more on cardio exercises, yes? You are doing some body weight stuff for general fitness? Do you still have about 20(?) lbs of body fat that you want to reduce?
My goal is to be stronger, so simply at this moment in time I'm working on pull up and dips etc, to gain enough strength to do those.
I've seen distance runners, some faster and older than me with better strength and definition. I'm 5 foot 11 and weight 69kg, so I'd say less than 20lbs of body fat to reduce.
Hard to say if or for how long that kind of routine would help with recomp. You might want to consider a slight, maybe 200 to 300 calorie, deficit. This will help you lean down slowly and help with maintaining muscle mass to get the definition you are looking for.
ETA: at you height and weight, I'd be surprised you have any fat to lose.
It is not a huge amount to lose really, just a bit to get definition.1 -
Here's a question I'm not fully understanding and hope others can help.
My macros are set at 40 carbs and then 30/30 split between protein and fat. At the maintenance level this is 153g of protein a day.
When I exercise, all the macros increase with the calories as expected, but how important is it to hit the upper protein goal?
I'm eating loads of tempeh and vegan protein shakes twice a day but its a tough goal to reach and even if not vegan, you only digest or use is it 35g max at one time?0 -
richiechowns wrote: »Here's a question I'm not fully understanding and hope others can help.
My macros are set at 40 carbs and then 30/30 split between protein and fat. At the maintenance level this is 153g of protein a day.
When I exercise, all the macros increase with the calories as expected, but how important is it to hit the upper protein goal?
I'm eating loads of tempeh and vegan protein shakes twice a day but its a tough goal to reach and even if not vegan, you only digest or use is it 35g max at one time?
That protein goal is a little higher than it needs to be. Ideally, 1 gram per lb of lean mass is good. Many don't know their lean mass and use a ballpark of .8 grams per lb of body weight. Beyond that amount, there is a rate of diminishing return.
The study data on protein absorption is based on research using liquid whey shakes for control purposes. Eating whole food, non liquid protein sources means a much slower transit time and absorption rate. It's really nothing to be concerned about unless you are a body building looking to maximize every element for gains. I practice IF and only eat 2x per day. I get all my protein, about 140 grams, in just those 2 meals and have good muscle mass and growth with weight training. So, don't make yourself crazy with timing. Just get enough protein from mostly whole food sources and your body will figure it out.
3 -
Great advice! I also found this article useful so posting it here in case it helps others too.
https://blog.myfitnesspal.com/essential-guide-to-protein/
I calculated my target range before I read any articles on this topic and my target protein level was soooo high... I was perplexed until I read a bit and realized I neglected to convert my lbs to kg first. Note to self: Don't forget the conversion!
3 -
DrTeeeevil wrote: »Great advice! I also found this article useful so posting it here in case it helps others too.
https://blog.myfitnesspal.com/essential-guide-to-protein/
I calculated my target range before I read any articles on this topic and my target protein level was soooo high... I was perplexed until I read a bit and realized I neglected to convert my lbs to kg first. Note to self: Don't forget the conversion!
Awesome! Thx for sharing this. I was using a g / lb weight. wrong....0 -
richiechowns wrote: »Here's a question I'm not fully understanding and hope others can help.
My macros are set at 40 carbs and then 30/30 split between protein and fat. At the maintenance level this is 153g of protein a day.
When I exercise, all the macros increase with the calories as expected, but how important is it to hit the upper protein goal?
I'm eating loads of tempeh and vegan protein shakes twice a day but its a tough goal to reach and even if not vegan, you only digest or use is it 35g max at one time?
That protein goal is a little higher than it needs to be. Ideally, 1 gram per lb of lean mass is good. Many don't know their lean mass and use a ballpark of .8 grams per lb of body weight. Beyond that amount, there is a rate of diminishing return.
The study data on protein absorption is based on research using liquid whey shakes for control purposes. Eating whole food, non liquid protein sources means a much slower transit time and absorption rate. It's really nothing to be concerned about unless you are a body building looking to maximize every element for gains. I practice IF and only eat 2x per day. I get all my protein, about 140 grams, in just those 2 meals and have good muscle mass and growth with weight training. So, don't make yourself crazy with timing. Just get enough protein from mostly whole food sources and your body will figure it out.
Thanks, so I weigh 152lb or 69kg so I really need 55g of protein then based on using kgs or 121g if it were lbs.
0 -
DrTeeeevil wrote: »Great advice! I also found this article useful so posting it here in case it helps others too.
https://blog.myfitnesspal.com/essential-guide-to-protein/
I calculated my target range before I read any articles on this topic and my target protein level was soooo high... I was perplexed until I read a bit and realized I neglected to convert my lbs to kg first. Note to self: Don't forget the conversion!
Seems if you search Google and look at healthline.com for example it is shown as 1g per lb or 2.2g per kg.
Which source is correct info I wonder...
0 -
richiechowns wrote: »richiechowns wrote: »Here's a question I'm not fully understanding and hope others can help.
My macros are set at 40 carbs and then 30/30 split between protein and fat. At the maintenance level this is 153g of protein a day.
When I exercise, all the macros increase with the calories as expected, but how important is it to hit the upper protein goal?
I'm eating loads of tempeh and vegan protein shakes twice a day but its a tough goal to reach and even if not vegan, you only digest or use is it 35g max at one time?
That protein goal is a little higher than it needs to be. Ideally, 1 gram per lb of lean mass is good. Many don't know their lean mass and use a ballpark of .8 grams per lb of body weight. Beyond that amount, there is a rate of diminishing return.
The study data on protein absorption is based on research using liquid whey shakes for control purposes. Eating whole food, non liquid protein sources means a much slower transit time and absorption rate. It's really nothing to be concerned about unless you are a body building looking to maximize every element for gains. I practice IF and only eat 2x per day. I get all my protein, about 140 grams, in just those 2 meals and have good muscle mass and growth with weight training. So, don't make yourself crazy with timing. Just get enough protein from mostly whole food sources and your body will figure it out.
Thanks, so I weigh 152lb or 69kg so I really need 55g of protein then based on using kgs or 121g if it were lbs.
It's .73g - 1g per lb or 1.7-2.2g/kg. You need closer to 120-150g of protein. Although, based on the information I have seen from Eric Helms, Brad Schoendfeld, an argument can be made to be at the top end or higher while you are trying to build muscle.
ETA: It should be noted that those protein numbers are based on animal proteins which are higher quality due to higher levels of L-Luecine. If anyone is plant based, they should be consuming higher amounts.1 -
richiechowns wrote: »DrTeeeevil wrote: »Great advice! I also found this article useful so posting it here in case it helps others too.
https://blog.myfitnesspal.com/essential-guide-to-protein/
I calculated my target range before I read any articles on this topic and my target protein level was soooo high... I was perplexed until I read a bit and realized I neglected to convert my lbs to kg first. Note to self: Don't forget the conversion!
Seems if you search Google and look at healthline.com for example it is shown as 1g per lb or 2.2g per kg.
Which source is correct info I wonder...
The correct answer comes from Dr. Stuart Phillips and Dr. Brad Schoenfeld. They are, respectively, the # 1 and # 2 protein metabolism researchers in the world.1 -
So more protein as a vegan.
Also I'm 69kg and about 17%BF I suspect, so that'd be 57kg lean and so 126g of protein at 2.2 x LBM0 -
My math
CW = 169 lbs
C LMM = 155 lbs lean muscle mass at last caliper test. (I know many don't believe I'm at 9% BF but oh well that's what I measure.)
155 lbs = 70 kg lean muscle mass
@0.8g/kg = 0.8*70=56g
@1.2/kg = 1.2*70=84g
@1.4/kg = 1.4*70=100g
So I've been naturally eating 84g a day and not gaining or losing.
I'm going to increase to 100g a day and see what can happen. For me this means a cup of Greek yogurt every evening. I don't even need to do protein powder to get there.0 -
richiechowns wrote: »So more protein as a vegan.
Also I'm 69kg and about 17%BF I suspect, so that'd be 57kg lean and so 126g of protein at 2.2 x LBM
A good goal (as a range) would be 117-150g. It doesn't always have to be perfect. But like @haybales stated, the resistance training aspect is going to be key. You need a good resistance based stimulus to drive growth. HIIT and cardio isn't going to fully cut it.
And if you are trying to squeeze out all the gains, you should consume around 30g of high quality protein 3-4x a day.2 -
richiechowns wrote: »richiechowns wrote: »Here's a question I'm not fully understanding and hope others can help.
My macros are set at 40 carbs and then 30/30 split between protein and fat. At the maintenance level this is 153g of protein a day.
When I exercise, all the macros increase with the calories as expected, but how important is it to hit the upper protein goal?
I'm eating loads of tempeh and vegan protein shakes twice a day but its a tough goal to reach and even if not vegan, you only digest or use is it 35g max at one time?
That protein goal is a little higher than it needs to be. Ideally, 1 gram per lb of lean mass is good. Many don't know their lean mass and use a ballpark of .8 grams per lb of body weight. Beyond that amount, there is a rate of diminishing return.
The study data on protein absorption is based on research using liquid whey shakes for control purposes. Eating whole food, non liquid protein sources means a much slower transit time and absorption rate. It's really nothing to be concerned about unless you are a body building looking to maximize every element for gains. I practice IF and only eat 2x per day. I get all my protein, about 140 grams, in just those 2 meals and have good muscle mass and growth with weight training. So, don't make yourself crazy with timing. Just get enough protein from mostly whole food sources and your body will figure it out.
Thanks, so I weigh 152lb or 69kg so I really need 55g of protein then based on using kgs or 121g if it were lbs.
121g based on pounds.1 -
My math
CW = 169 lbs
C LMM = 155 lbs lean muscle mass at last caliper test. (I know many don't believe I'm at 9% BF but oh well that's what I measure.)
155 lbs = 70 kg lean muscle mass
@0.8g/kg = 0.8*70=56g
@1.2/kg = 1.2*70=84g
@1.4/kg = 1.4*70=100g
So I've been naturally eating 84g a day and not gaining or losing.
I'm going to increase to 100g a day and see what can happen. For me this means a cup of Greek yogurt every evening. I don't even need to do protein powder to get there.
You are off. It's 1.7-2.2g/kg. You are mixing lbs and kg recommendations.4 -
richiechowns wrote: »DrTeeeevil wrote: »Great advice! I also found this article useful so posting it here in case it helps others too.
https://blog.myfitnesspal.com/essential-guide-to-protein/
I calculated my target range before I read any articles on this topic and my target protein level was soooo high... I was perplexed until I read a bit and realized I neglected to convert my lbs to kg first. Note to self: Don't forget the conversion!
Seems if you search Google and look at healthline.com for example it is shown as 1g per lb or 2.2g per kg.
Which source is correct info I wonder...
The numbers I gave you were from Dr. Eric Helms one of the most prominent researchers who has synthesized much of the research on protein in his writing. BTW, he is a super interesting and intelligent guy and is worth reading or listening to his podcasts. Healthline is not a create resource for this type of data IMHO.
According to Helms .75 grams per lb is the sweet spot. .8 grams gives a little buffer. Beyond that the benefits diminish. Of course if someone has had Dexa scans or Hydrostatic testing and knows their body fat with a reasonable degree of accuracy, 1 grams per lb of lean mass.
Edited to add: I didn't notice there was another page and psuLemon had added in some good info and additional details.2 -
richiechowns wrote: »richiechowns wrote: »Here's a question I'm not fully understanding and hope others can help.
My macros are set at 40 carbs and then 30/30 split between protein and fat. At the maintenance level this is 153g of protein a day.
When I exercise, all the macros increase with the calories as expected, but how important is it to hit the upper protein goal?
I'm eating loads of tempeh and vegan protein shakes twice a day but its a tough goal to reach and even if not vegan, you only digest or use is it 35g max at one time?
That protein goal is a little higher than it needs to be. Ideally, 1 gram per lb of lean mass is good. Many don't know their lean mass and use a ballpark of .8 grams per lb of body weight. Beyond that amount, there is a rate of diminishing return.
The study data on protein absorption is based on research using liquid whey shakes for control purposes. Eating whole food, non liquid protein sources means a much slower transit time and absorption rate. It's really nothing to be concerned about unless you are a body building looking to maximize every element for gains. I practice IF and only eat 2x per day. I get all my protein, about 140 grams, in just those 2 meals and have good muscle mass and growth with weight training. So, don't make yourself crazy with timing. Just get enough protein from mostly whole food sources and your body will figure it out.
Thanks, so I weigh 152lb or 69kg so I really need 55g of protein then based on using kgs or 121g if it were lbs.
It's .73g - 1g per lb or 1.7-2.2g/kg. You need closer to 120-150g of protein. Although, based on the information I have seen from Eric Helms, Brad Schoendfeld, an argument can be made to be at the top end or higher while you are trying to build muscle.
ETA: It should be noted that those protein numbers are based on animal proteins which are higher quality due to higher levels of L-Luecine. If anyone is plant based, they should be consuming higher amounts.
As a vegan, yes you want to consume more for the reasons psuLemon details above.1 -
So this article in MFP is wrong?
Please provide links to support your statements. THX
I really want to get this straight.0 -
So this article in MFP is wrong?
Please provide links to support your statements. THX
I really want to get this straight.
https://jissn.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12970-017-0174-y
Here is a good study that goes through a variety of situations. If you are maintaining, I would get it around 1.4-1.7g/kg. It gets higher during weight loss and the muscle building.0 -
Yes that is wrong according to much better sources.
Which were referenced above.
Oh - just gotta add.
LBM is Lean Body Mass - it's everything not fat - water, bones, muscle, organs.
It's not Lean Muscle Mass. No such thing really. well, except at butcher perhaps getting a lean cut of meat.
ETA - that chart isn't far off though, just a little low.
The math they do for you though is rather sad though - where is 0.8 in the chart?2 -
So this article in MFP is wrong?
Please provide links to support your statements. THX
I really want to get this straight.
Hey
Your current protein intake is low compared with what most lifters would regard as optimal. Eric helms book on nutrition is worth a read if you want some solid reliable info and advice.2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.7K Getting Started
- 260.1K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 419 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.9K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.5K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions