Phinney and Volek....
Options
AngInCanada
Posts: 947 Member
I was just briefly reading about Dr Phinney and Dr Volek And their macro recommendations for weight loss and I'm curious if anyone follows them? Their analogy about how our bodies are like cars and when we our tank (body) is half full or 3/4 full of gas (fat) we don't need to fill the tank up because the car has enough for now. So they recommend a higher amount of protein (gram) wise than fat. If we don't do hugy fat, our bodies use up the fat stored in our body. Right now my macros are 10% carbs, 70% fat, 20% protein. If i were to change to Phinney and Voleks way it'd be more like 10% carbs, 40% protein, 50% fat.
0
Replies
-
My goals will also have more fat than protein, per gram. That's only because at my calorie goal, it would be over 215 grams of protein each day for it to even break even with fat. I aim for 0% carbs, 20-25% protein, and 75-80% fat.
Edit: That's around 57% fat to 43% fat by grams.0 -
Phinney and Volek don't have static recommendations. They recommend increasing your fat percentage as you approach maintenance -- the lower starting fat percentage allows you to burn more body fat while maintaining a calorie deficit.
The calorie deficit should be "natural" and due to decreased hunger. No need for "high" fat unless you want to stay low carb during maintenance.0 -
Phinney and Volek don't have static recommendations. They recommend increasing your fat percentage as you approach maintenance -- the lower starting fat percentage allows you to burn more body fat while maintaining a calorie deficit.
The calorie deficit should be "natural" and due to decreased hunger. No need for "high" fat unless you want to stay low carb during maintenance.
The calorie deficit is definitely due to decreased hunger. Am pleasantly surprised with that. I'm just wondering if my protein is too low?0 -
How low is your protein? In grams.0
-
-
They give a pretty wide range for protein.
Women Men Height grams ounces grams ounces 4' 10" 63-125 13 4' 11" 64-130 14 5' 0" 65-135 14 5' 1" 66-138 14 5' 2" 70-145 15 74-154 16 5' 3" 71-149 15 75-157 17 5' 4" 71-149 16 76-159 17 5' 5" 73-152 16 78-162 17 5' 6" 75-156 16 79-165 17 5' 7" 76-159 17 81-168 18 5' 8" 78-162 17 82-171 18 5' 9" 80-166 18 84-175 18 5' 10" 81-169 18 86-178 19 5' 11" 83-173 18 87-182 19 6' 0" 85-176 19 89-186 20 6' 1" 91-190 20 6' 2" 93-194 21 6' 3" 95-199 21 6' 4" 98-204 21
For carbs, they say less than 50g/day.
For fat, till satiety, but don't go crazy.0 -
That range IS a bit higher than keto calcs usually suggest. I'm 5'9.5" and the suggested minimum for me is 72g (max is 118g). I always try to keep mine in the P&V range. Which for me is 80-166g.0
-
AngInCanada wrote: »
Yeah, I'm thinking that is a decent number. Like you, I work out a fair amount. I personally try to aim for 100g or over daily, but as long as I don't go under the P&V minimum on low protein days, then I don't worry about having too little.
If you are feeling like the 95g isn't serving you well enough, up it 10 or 20g. You ARE doing Body Beast, right? Trying to work on the muscle mass? So more protein, as long as you aren't going bananas on it like a starving pride of lions, is perfectly fine, IMO.
0 -
I've always been of the opinion that the way they put it (and the way OKL does it) was convoluted and basically overthinking it. The charts I always see associated with both include the amount burned by the body, so it ends up being something like "50% fat from body fat, 5% carbs, 15% protein, 30% fat" and makes you think about the "fat from body fat" part, when that's really overkill and adds unnecessary mental overhead.
Take your TDEE, drop 500 or so calories from it and split up the macros among the calories you have left. Eat to satiety and don't worry too much if you're under that TDEE-500 amount, and try not to go too far over it on a regular basis (and consider tweaking things if you find yourself struggling), and the body will use body fat for the energy it needs, without you needing to think about it.
Take P&V's numbers and remove the body fat component, and you'll see it's TDEE with something like a 50% deficit at first, and an intake macro spread of 5-10/30/60-65 or so, which isn't far from what is generally recommended anyway.
In other words, it's not the ratio of fat to protein that's making one lose weight, it's the fact that it's a large caloric deficit.
And, of course, you're going to change the amount of fat you take in in order to influence rate of loss on this way of eating, because you hold carbs and protein steady. So, when you decrease fat, you decrease overall caloric intake (and, because you're changing the total amount of calories, the ratios necessarily change).0 -
I go for 200 grams of protein
It works
The chart is food for thought.
When I do get to where I want to be maybe I need to dial it back slightly
0 -
I followed them from the start. Macros are 65% Fat, 25% P and 10% C. I try to keep my Net Carbs under 50g though. The works out to 125g of protein or so a day. It's worked well for me, however I'd start by saying that I had less than 50 lbs to lose. I don't think my metabolism was too screwed up. My cholesterol and triglycerides were borderline. Sugar wasn't not quite borderline.
I've had good results. Seldom feel ravenous and if I occasionally binge on carbs that seems to be more stress related. Although I seem to be more inclined to indulge after doing hi-intensity workouts. Other than a temporary gain of a pound or two I don't feel any major side effects either.
I've less than 15lbs to get to my goal and after 9 months I feel like their recommendations are a good starting place for anyone without major health issues already. Keto Flu was not severe and I'd say I've been in Ketosis for nearly the whole 9 months although I've only used urine for testing. YMMV.0 -
KittensMaster wrote: »I go for 200 grams of protein
It works
The chart is food for thought.
When I do get to where I want to be maybe I need to dial it back slightly
in my case that would tax my kidneys too much. I do think it's a large number, but obviously right for you
0 -
baconslave wrote: »AngInCanada wrote: »
Yeah, I'm thinking that is a decent number. Like you, I work out a fair amount. I personally try to aim for 100g or over daily, but as long as I don't go under the P&V minimum on low protein days, then I don't worry about having too little.
If you are feeling like the 95g isn't serving you well enough, up it 10 or 20g. You ARE doing Body Beast, right? Trying to work on the muscle mass? So more protein, as long as you aren't going bananas on it like a starving pride of lions, is perfectly fine, IMO.
I am doing Body Beast yes but not to get huge (I am in a calorie deficit so I know its not possible anyways). I've lost wwifur before strictly through cardio and became "skinny fat" so Im bound to do it right this time.0 -
Their recommendations do make sense.
When I binge researched and started eating this way 3.5 months ago I thought that the fat percentage would be hard for me to hit and that protein would be easy.
It has been the opposite. Fat is easy and I struggle to eat 90 grams of protein per day, and according to the above chart my minimum should be 86. So I end up 70 fat, 20 protein and keep under 20 total carbs per day.
I wasn't concerned about it until I found the Facebook group 'that shall not be mentioned' and they are pretty militant about those numbers and "allow" no deviation. I get where they're coming from, and the founder and moderator team seem a bit younger and have goals of ripped, beautiful bodies. :-)
As an old fat guy my goals are a bit more modest, health and leaving morbid obesity in the rear view mirror. So far averaging 2 lbs down per week so I can't complain, but my eye is always on long term so I appreciate this discussion.
So.... fat is easy, and I'm trying to be more intentional about protein.0 -
baconslave wrote: »That range IS a bit higher than keto calcs usually suggest.
I haven't looked at all of the calcs, but at least one of them makes recommendations based on the "ketogenic ratio," which is a pretty out-dated notion. Lyle McDonald has a good article about it here:
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/nutrition/ketosis-and-the-ketogenic-ratio-qa.html/
However, invariably when people tried to apply the KR to low-carbohydrate fat loss diets, one of two things happened. If the person set calories appropriately and used the KR, the protein intake ended up being far too low (because dietary fat had to be so damn high). Alternately, if they set protein appropriately and tried to scale dietary fat to the proper ratio, the caloric intake ended up being too high.
The former was a poor choice from the standpoint of protein sparing; the second limited (or eliminated fat loss).
So basically I threw out the ketogenic ratio.
Phinney and Volek base their recommendations on a combination of theory and empirical studies. I don't agree 100% with everything they say, but I think they get most of it right.
0 -
baconslave wrote: »That range IS a bit higher than keto calcs usually suggest.
I haven't looked at all of the calcs, but at least one of them makes recommendations based on the "ketogenic ratio," which is a pretty out-dated notion. Lyle McDonald has a good article about it here:
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/nutrition/ketosis-and-the-ketogenic-ratio-qa.html/
However, invariably when people tried to apply the KR to low-carbohydrate fat loss diets, one of two things happened. If the person set calories appropriately and used the KR, the protein intake ended up being far too low (because dietary fat had to be so damn high). Alternately, if they set protein appropriately and tried to scale dietary fat to the proper ratio, the caloric intake ended up being too high.
The former was a poor choice from the standpoint of protein sparing; the second limited (or eliminated fat loss).
So basically I threw out the ketogenic ratio.
Phinney and Volek base their recommendations on a combination of theory and empirical studies. I don't agree 100% with everything they say, but I think they get most of it right.
The one generally recommended around here, http://keto-calculator.ankerl.com/, does not use the ketogenic ratio (in fact, I personally haven't seen any that do, as even for medical purposes, it's considered a bit outdated in favor of something like modified Atkins; to be fair, I haven't particularly looked, either, though), but rather it calculates caloric needs using a typical calculator, gives you a range for protein between .5 and 1g per pound of lean mass, lets you set your carbohydrates, and fills in the remaining calories with fat.
The end result is pretty much the same as P&V's numbers, but in my opinion, easier to wrap one's head around.0 -
Here's the calc I had looked at (because somebody had recently posted it) that is based on the KR:
http://www.flexibleketogenic.com/0 -
I'd love to read their book, I have not found it in New Zealand. I did find one website that sells you stuff here from overseas but they wanted $75 for the book. I don't worry too much about the protein to fat ratio, they usually just fall where they may and it ends up in a good ratio most days.0
-
Here's the calc I had looked at (because somebody had recently posted it) that is based on the KR:
http://www.flexibleketogenic.com/
Ah, yeah, that ratio. I was thinking the one used for the classical ketogenic diet (which is a 4:1 ratio).
The one used by that calculator actually isn't too bad, but does kind of require you know what you're doing. I tossed my general numbers in there and got something around the 2.00 mark, without getting into "too low protein" territory, but it does require keeping carbs really low. It's easier to see where people who are more afraid of dropping carbs very far could end up with very little protein and a bunch of the other two.0 -
When I started out 09/01/2014 I did set my macros for 70%F, 20%P, 10%C and that's what I followed for a few months after which I changed them to 75%F, 15%P, 15%C and that is mostly what I follow now although I personally tend to like my fat % around 77-78% on a daily basis. The ratio % s can be adjusted. You just need to find what works best for you/your body and do that.0
-
So according to a Facebook group (with a LOT of rules) that follow keto diet by phinney and volek, at 5'8 I am supposed to eat a max of 1280 calories a day with a macro ratio of 5%C/40%P/55%F hmmmmmm0
-
AngInCanada wrote: »So according to a Facebook group (with a LOT of rules) that follow keto diet by phinney and volek, at 5'8 I am supposed to eat a max of 1280 calories a day with a macro ratio of 5%C/40%P/55%F hmmmmmm
If this is the same as a group others have complained about before, run away as fast as you can. Come join the Greaseriders group on facebook (which is this group) if you need support there.0 -
AngInCanada wrote: »So according to a Facebook group (with a LOT of rules) that follow keto diet by phinney and volek, at 5'8 I am supposed to eat a max of 1280 calories a day with a macro ratio of 5%C/40%P/55%F hmmmmmm
I did post a slide from one of their presentations that showed a pretty extreme calorie deficit -- on the order of 1000 kcal/day. But that's just an example, and it's supposed to reflect a natural deficit that people had with "ad lib" feeding based on some of their studies.
They don't prescribe a certain calorie deficit. They only prescribe adequate protein (which is higher than most people recommend), and keeping carbs at around 10% (or under 50g = 200 kcal).
As others have said, experiment and go with what works for you. Of course, it's hard to tell if the weight you're losing is muscle or fat. Their protein levels will ensure that it's mostly fat.
0 -
AngInCanada wrote: »So according to a Facebook group (with a LOT of rules) that follow keto diet by phinney and volek, at 5'8 I am supposed to eat a max of 1280 calories a day with a macro ratio of 5%C/40%P/55%F hmmmmmm
If this is the same as a group others have complained about before, run away as fast as you can. Come join the Greaseriders group on facebook (which is this group) if you need support there.
It could very well be. don't post anything related to Atkins, high fat or cheat meals. Don't post anything about egg fasts. Don't advise people to eat nore fat. Don't post anything to do with fat bombs or artificial sweeteners. Deleted my post and left the group. As my sister told me "don't fix it if its not broken". I'm losing weight at 1-2 lbs a week, losing inches, clothes fitting looser, energy levels high, not suffering during my runs. So just going to leave my macros and calorie levels as they are. Thanks everyone.0
This discussion has been closed.