Personal Trainer & Weight Management Certified here to help!
Replies
-
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »
Possibly. I get people that comment all the time that they can't believe I can eat pizza, fast food, and processed foods and not gain. But, then again they are only hearing about the junk food and not the other 80% of the time of nutritious eating.christinev297 wrote: »I guess it may sometimes be seen as bragging?? "I eat all the junk I can fit into my calories". Obviously not in those exact words, but that is how it sometimes comes across.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I think one of the challenges is you're a active in shape individual that burns a bunch of calories. You or someone like yourself can get proper nutrition (your macros and micros) eating 80% nutritious. For someone on a lower calorie diet, it's going to be much more difficult to get needed nutrition if 20% of say 1500 calories come from candy, cakes, chips, ice cream, etc.
Well I can hit my macro requirements in 1200 calories if I chose to. Leaving the 20% (300 calories) for chips (85 cals), Ice cream (90 cals), cookies (72 cals) because I choose the ones I like (eg Walkers pops / Quavers - Solero / Fab, McVities Rich Tea)
And it's not like the less nutritiously rich foods you mention don't help with hitting macros too
But it's about choice - there's no reason why people can't manage it - even if it's difficult - if they choose to / if it's important to their wellbeing
Take a 1200 calorie diet to a registered dietician where 20% of the calories are from nutritionally less dense food (chips, cookies, candy, cake, etc) and get their thoughts .
Why would their thoughts matter? If you are hitting your macro requirements, it doesn't mater how your intake is made up.
Well, macros, micros and sufficient variety. Oh, and low nitrates, low trans fats, not too much iron, mix your vegetables (not too much kale or broccoli)....
Yeah, it doesn't matter. :sick:
are you saying it does matter or it doesn't - my filter is off
I'm saying intake matters - it isn't just macros.
One of the great ironies of trying to get healthy are those people that decide to go all natural and end up eating too much monolithic foods:
too much carrots -- make you ill
too much kale and broccoli -- make you ill
too much vitamins - I think you get where this is going
A phrase like "If you are hitting your macro requirements, it doesn't mater (sic) how your intake is made up." is wrong. Dietary composition matters, what doesn't matter is dat der donut or dat der sushi. Total composition matters, single items do not.
There is a difference in context.
I would generally assume that if someone was consuming say 1500 calories and that they intake consisted of say 50% carbs, 30% Fat, 20% protein and that they were hitting those percentages and also staying within the 1500 calorie range that there is a very good chance that they aren't eating too many carrots or too much kale and broccoli.
Please explain to me how someone could hit their calorie count and all their macros and their dietary composition be completely out of whack? I would be very interested in a daily diary entry for that.
My perceptive - you can see if a lot with people converting to lifestyles (vegetarian/vegan or lchf) without educating themselves on what foods are requires to address nutritional requirements (protein in vegetarians, too low fat intake in lchf or even too little sodium). In fact, i have known a few people hospitalized for it.
But then you have people who aren't hitting their macros and therefore are removed from the group of people who are doing as I said and are hitting calories and their macros.
0 -
Why would the fact that different people have different amount of "flexible" calories available invalidate the concept?Packerjohn wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »
Possibly. I get people that comment all the time that they can't believe I can eat pizza, fast food, and processed foods and not gain. But, then again they are only hearing about the junk food and not the other 80% of the time of nutritious eating.christinev297 wrote: »I guess it may sometimes be seen as bragging?? "I eat all the junk I can fit into my calories". Obviously not in those exact words, but that is how it sometimes comes across.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I think one of the challenges is you're a active in shape individual that burns a bunch of calories. You or someone like yourself can get proper nutrition (your macros and micros) eating 80% nutritious. For someone on a lower calorie diet, it's going to be much more difficult to get needed nutrition if 20% of say 1500 calories come from candy, cakes, chips, ice cream, etc.
Well I can hit my macro requirements in 1200 calories if I chose to. Leaving the 20% (300 calories) for chips (85 cals), Ice cream (90 cals), cookies (72 cals) because I choose the ones I like (eg Walkers pops / Quavers - Solero / Fab, McVities Rich Tea)
And it's not like the less nutritiously rich foods you mention don't help with hitting macros too
But it's about choice - there's no reason why people can't manage it - even if it's difficult - if they choose to / if it's important to their wellbeing
Take a 1200 calorie a day diet to a registered dietician where 20% of the calories are from nutritionally less dense food (chips, cookies, candy, cake, etc) and get their thoughts .0 -
Im hitting around 2200 calories a day started into weight lifting about three weeks ago on top of doing cardio. My stats are male, 30, 255lbs , 6'2 height. Im not noticing the scale move at all past two weeks. I usually run 50P/30C/20F macros. My diary should be open so any help would be greatly appreciated.0
-
janejellyroll wrote: »
But to be clear, our bodies don't work on a 24 hour clock. Maintaining nutritional health isn't dependent on hitting some magic number in every category every day. This is why variety is good...and likely more important than other qualities that get more focus (such as organic, "clean", etc).
I suspect a dirty diet with variety will likely be healthier than a monolithic clean diet.
One benefit though...it leads to those humorously ridiculous comparisons of extremes where people argue 1500 calories of broccoli is healthier than 1500 calories of doughnuts. (It isn't.)0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »
Not a very satisfying answer - Deficiency means "not getting enough vitamins"...
The issue is that it can lead any of a variety of issues such as mood disorder, hair loss, bone issue, anaemia, protein absorption issues, increased risk of certain diseases or .... nothing at all.
0 -
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »
Not a very satisfying answer - Deficiency means "not getting enough vitamins"...
The issue is that it can lead any of a variety of issues such as mood disorder, hair loss, bone issue, anaemia, protein absorption issues, increased risk of certain diseases or .... nothing at all.
I would agree if you mean the answer is "vague," but I don't think that necessarily makes it unsatisfying. Deficiencies have many different symptoms that vary depending on what you're deficient in. That's why I didn't name any specific symptoms.0 -
jofjltncb6 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »
But to be clear, our bodies don't work on a 24 hour clock. Maintaining nutritional health isn't dependent on hitting some magic number in every category every day. This is why variety is good...and likely more important than other qualities that get more focus (such as organic, "clean", etc).
I suspect a dirty diet with variety will likely be healthier than a monolithic clean diet.
One benefit though...it leads to those humorously ridiculous comparisons of extremes where people argue 1500 calories of broccoli is healthier than 1500 calories of doughnuts. (It isn't.)
I agree -- within the context of a 24-hour day, being short in anything isn't going to be an issue.0 -
Here's one meme to address both psulemon's new baby and the empty calories tangent:
0 -
have a question if any of you can help. I've been exercising and trying to eat healthier for about 8 months now and have lost about 50 lbs and went from a size 18 to a size 9. so I've had some success and i feel great, but i still weigh 180 lbs. im a female about 5 7". it seems i barely ever lose any scale weight yet i keep having to buy new clothes. yet they say you cant build muscle in a deficit so it makes me wonder if im not in a deficit? i should be as i do 2 hours of exercise days a week. i also only seem to lose in chuncks. weight stays the same for 3 weeks then i lose 5 lbs overnight. one time i lose 10 lbs in 3 days after not losing for 5 weeks. it makes it very hard to stay motivated and track my food when no matter what i do im not seeing the scale move. any help or explanations would be great. thank you0
-
kshama2001 wrote: »Here's one meme to address both psulemon's new baby and the empty calories tangent:
Not unless you have someone willing to trade you some limes for those lemons.0 -
leanne0627 wrote: »have a question if any of you can help. I've been exercising and trying to eat healthier for about 8 months now and have lost about 50 lbs and went from a size 18 to a size 9. so I've had some success and i feel great, but i still weigh 180 lbs. im a female about 5 7". it seems i barely ever lose any scale weight yet i keep having to buy new clothes. yet they say you cant build muscle in a deficit so it makes me wonder if im not in a deficit? i should be as i do 2 hours of exercise days a week. i also only seem to lose in chuncks. weight stays the same for 3 weeks then i lose 5 lbs overnight. one time i lose 10 lbs in 3 days after not losing for 5 weeks. it makes it very hard to stay motivated and track my food when no matter what i do im not seeing the scale move. any help or explanations would be great. thank you
0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »Gianfranco_R wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »
Possibly. I get people that comment all the time that they can't believe I can eat pizza, fast food, and processed foods and not gain. But, then again they are only hearing about the junk food and not the other 80% of the time of nutritious eating.christinev297 wrote: »I guess it may sometimes be seen as bragging?? "I eat all the junk I can fit into my calories". Obviously not in those exact words, but that is how it sometimes comes across.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I think one of the challenges is you're a active in shape individual that burns a bunch of calories. You or someone like yourself can get proper nutrition (your macros and micros) eating 80% nutritious. For someone on a lower calorie diet, it's going to be much more difficult to get needed nutrition if 20% of say 1500 calories come from candy, cakes, chips, ice cream, etc.
Well I can hit my macro requirements in 1200 calories if I chose to. Leaving the 20% (300 calories) for chips (85 cals), Ice cream (90 cals), cookies (72 cals) because I choose the ones I like (eg Walkers pops / Quavers - Solero / Fab, McVities Rich Tea)
And it's not like the less nutritiously rich foods you mention don't help with hitting macros too
But it's about choice - there's no reason why people can't manage it - even if it's difficult - if they choose to / if it's important to their wellbeing
Take a 1200 calorie diet to a registered dietician where 20% of the calories are from nutritionally less dense food (chips, cookies, candy, cake, etc) and get their thoughts .
Why would their thoughts matter? If you are hitting your macro requirements, it doesn't mater how your intake is made up.
so what is your thought on this statement @psulemon ?
does it fit with your 80/20 rule, or it is just me struggling again with reading comprehension?
I wasn't aware that psulemon was the translator of all posts on MFP and the one who determines if everyone's diet was appropriate for them. Wow that's a lot of responsibility @psulemon! You should ask them to double your mod salary!
Its ok. I am always willing to provide some perspective. And i got time right now while my wife is progressing during her labor.
When life gives you lemons............... procreate?0 -
Congratulations Dad!0
-
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »
Possibly. I get people that comment all the time that they can't believe I can eat pizza, fast food, and processed foods and not gain. But, then again they are only hearing about the junk food and not the other 80% of the time of nutritious eating.christinev297 wrote: »I guess it may sometimes be seen as bragging?? "I eat all the junk I can fit into my calories". Obviously not in those exact words, but that is how it sometimes comes across.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I think one of the challenges is you're a active in shape individual that burns a bunch of calories. You or someone like yourself can get proper nutrition (your macros and micros) eating 80% nutritious. For someone on a lower calorie diet, it's going to be much more difficult to get needed nutrition if 20% of say 1500 calories come from candy, cakes, chips, ice cream, etc.
Well I can hit my macro requirements in 1200 calories if I chose to. Leaving the 20% (300 calories) for chips (85 cals), Ice cream (90 cals), cookies (72 cals) because I choose the ones I like (eg Walkers pops / Quavers - Solero / Fab, McVities Rich Tea)
And it's not like the less nutritiously rich foods you mention don't help with hitting macros too
But it's about choice - there's no reason why people can't manage it - even if it's difficult - if they choose to / if it's important to their wellbeing
Take a 1200 calorie diet to a registered dietician where 20% of the calories are from nutritionally less dense food (chips, cookies, candy, cake, etc) and get their thoughts .
Why would their thoughts matter? If you are hitting your macro requirements, it doesn't mater how your intake is made up.
Well, macros, micros and sufficient variety. Oh, and low nitrates, low trans fats, not too much iron, mix your vegetables (not too much kale or broccoli)....
Yeah, it doesn't matter. :sick:
are you saying it does matter or it doesn't - my filter is off
I'm saying intake matters - it isn't just macros.
One of the great ironies of trying to get healthy are those people that decide to go all natural and end up eating too much monolithic foods:
too much carrots -- make you ill
too much kale and broccoli -- make you ill
too much vitamins - I think you get where this is going
A phrase like "If you are hitting your macro requirements, it doesn't mater (sic) how your intake is made up." is wrong. Dietary composition matters, what doesn't matter is dat der donut or dat der sushi. Total composition matters, single items do not.
There is a difference in context.
I would generally assume that if someone was consuming say 1500 calories and that they intake consisted of say 50% carbs, 30% Fat, 20% protein and that they were hitting those percentages and also staying within the 1500 calorie range that there is a very good chance that they aren't eating too many carrots or too much kale and broccoli.
Please explain to me how someone could hit their calorie count and all their macros and their dietary composition be completely out of whack? I would be very interested in a daily diary entry for that.
My perceptive - you can see if a lot with people converting to lifestyles (vegetarian/vegan or lchf) without educating themselves on what foods are requires to address nutritional requirements (protein in vegetarians, too low fat intake in lchf or even too little sodium). In fact, i have known a few people hospitalized for it.
My sister in law did this. Went vegan for ethical reasons (as well as with some bad science in mind) and is convinced she can get through the week on nothing but potatoes, bananas (I despise freelee the banana girl for this), and the occasional green.... and by green I mean a green pepper... I worry about her health, but it would literally take the return of Christ with a personal visit to her house to convince her she needs to branch out nutritionally...0 -
Well this has been the most entertaining and informative thread ever.
Legit question since all the knowledgeable seem to gather here. Do macros not matter if I'm hitting my calorie goal for weight loss? Apologies if this has been answered... I gave up after 7 pages.0 -
tristen_leigh wrote: »Well this has been the most entertaining and informative thread ever.
Legit question since all the knowledgeable seem to gather here. Do macros not matter if I'm hitting my calorie goal for weight loss? Apologies if this has been answered... I gave up after 7 pages.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/819925/the-basics-dont-complicate-it/p10 -
queenliz99 wrote: »tristen_leigh wrote: »Well this has been the most entertaining and informative thread ever.
Legit question since all the knowledgeable seem to gather here. Do macros not matter if I'm hitting my calorie goal for weight loss? Apologies if this has been answered... I gave up after 7 pages.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/819925/the-basics-dont-complicate-it/p1
THANK YOU.0 -
tristen_leigh wrote: »Well this has been the most entertaining and informative thread ever.
Legit question since all the knowledgeable seem to gather here. Do macros not matter if I'm hitting my calorie goal for weight loss? Apologies if this has been answered... I gave up after 7 pages.
For weight loss, no, they do not matter. For optimal health and performance, yes they do.0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »Gianfranco_R wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »
Possibly. I get people that comment all the time that they can't believe I can eat pizza, fast food, and processed foods and not gain. But, then again they are only hearing about the junk food and not the other 80% of the time of nutritious eating.christinev297 wrote: »I guess it may sometimes be seen as bragging?? "I eat all the junk I can fit into my calories". Obviously not in those exact words, but that is how it sometimes comes across.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I think one of the challenges is you're a active in shape individual that burns a bunch of calories. You or someone like yourself can get proper nutrition (your macros and micros) eating 80% nutritious. For someone on a lower calorie diet, it's going to be much more difficult to get needed nutrition if 20% of say 1500 calories come from candy, cakes, chips, ice cream, etc.
Well I can hit my macro requirements in 1200 calories if I chose to. Leaving the 20% (300 calories) for chips (85 cals), Ice cream (90 cals), cookies (72 cals) because I choose the ones I like (eg Walkers pops / Quavers - Solero / Fab, McVities Rich Tea)
And it's not like the less nutritiously rich foods you mention don't help with hitting macros too
But it's about choice - there's no reason why people can't manage it - even if it's difficult - if they choose to / if it's important to their wellbeing
Take a 1200 calorie diet to a registered dietician where 20% of the calories are from nutritionally less dense food (chips, cookies, candy, cake, etc) and get their thoughts .
Why would their thoughts matter? If you are hitting your macro requirements, it doesn't mater how your intake is made up.
so what is your thought on this statement @psulemon ?
does it fit with your 80/20 rule, or it is just me struggling again with reading comprehension?
I wasn't aware that psulemon was the translator of all posts on MFP and the one who determines if everyone's diet was appropriate for them. Wow that's a lot of responsibility @psulemon! You should ask them to double your mod salary!
Its ok. I am always willing to provide some perspective. And i got time right now while my wife is progressing during her labor.
Good luck with baby lemon!!!!
And to get back on topic, don't anyone try to take away my butter!0 -
I stopped reading on page three when it became clear that this thread's best purpose is as an example of why it is important to vet your sources, including "trainers".0
-
leanne0627 wrote: »have a question if any of you can help. I've been exercising and trying to eat healthier for about 8 months now and have lost about 50 lbs and went from a size 18 to a size 9. so I've had some success and i feel great, but i still weigh 180 lbs. im a female about 5 7". it seems i barely ever lose any scale weight yet i keep having to buy new clothes. yet they say you cant build muscle in a deficit so it makes me wonder if im not in a deficit? i should be as i do 2 hours of exercise days a week. i also only seem to lose in chuncks. weight stays the same for 3 weeks then i lose 5 lbs overnight. one time i lose 10 lbs in 3 days after not losing for 5 weeks. it makes it very hard to stay motivated and track my food when no matter what i do im not seeing the scale move. any help or explanations would be great. thank you
Honestly, you'd be better off to start your own thread, but if you are losing, even if it's in spurts, then you're in a deficit. Sometimes it comes off in whooshes. If you are averaging below 1/2 pound per week loss, you could try increasing your deficit by a bit.0 -
tristen_leigh wrote: »Well this has been the most entertaining and informative thread ever.
Legit question since all the knowledgeable seem to gather here. Do macros not matter if I'm hitting my calorie goal for weight loss? Apologies if this has been answered... I gave up after 7 pages.
Define "not matter".
If you eat a diet of 100% of any one macro, you're going to have a bad time.
But if you go over your protein macro by 5% and under you carb by 5%? Almost certainly won't matter at all.
The ratios are somewhat arbitrary...and the default MFP ratios are terrible for many. I found great success with a diet of 30/20/50 p/c/f for a long while. Had I ate the same but changed my macros on the site to 25/40/35, it would have looked like I was missing my macros badly, but I still would have had the same level of success.0 -
jofjltncb6 wrote: »tristen_leigh wrote: »Well this has been the most entertaining and informative thread ever.
Legit question since all the knowledgeable seem to gather here. Do macros not matter if I'm hitting my calorie goal for weight loss? Apologies if this has been answered... I gave up after 7 pages.
Define "not matter".
If you eat a diet of 100% of any one macro, you're going to have a bad time.
But if you go over your protein macro by 5% and under you carb by 5%? Almost certainly won't matter at all.
The ratios are somewhat arbitrary...and the default MFP ratios are terrible for many. I found great success with a diet of 30/20/50 p/c/f for a long while. Had I ate the same but changed my macros on the site to 25/40/35, it would have looked like I was missing my macros badly, but I still would have had the same level of success.
I'm not talking extremes by "not matter". I did a little research and adjusted macros accordingly (30/40/30). I seem to always be over my carbs but can usually stay within the range +/- about 5% for protein and fat.0 -
tristen_leigh wrote: »jofjltncb6 wrote: »tristen_leigh wrote: »Well this has been the most entertaining and informative thread ever.
Legit question since all the knowledgeable seem to gather here. Do macros not matter if I'm hitting my calorie goal for weight loss? Apologies if this has been answered... I gave up after 7 pages.
Define "not matter".
If you eat a diet of 100% of any one macro, you're going to have a bad time.
But if you go over your protein macro by 5% and under you carb by 5%? Almost certainly won't matter at all.
The ratios are somewhat arbitrary...and the default MFP ratios are terrible for many. I found great success with a diet of 30/20/50 p/c/f for a long while. Had I ate the same but changed my macros on the site to 25/40/35, it would have looked like I was missing my macros badly, but I still would have had the same level of success.
I'm not talking extremes by "not matter". I did a little research and adjusted macros accordingly (30/40/30). I seem to always be over my carbs but can usually stay within the range +/- about 5% for protein and fat.
What are your stats, what is your workout routine and total calories.
I am initial inclined to say you will be fine.0 -
Lame... I just went through all 12 pages to see if OP ever came back because I really wanted to hear more about clean eating and empty calories.0
-
blankiefinder wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »Gianfranco_R wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »
Possibly. I get people that comment all the time that they can't believe I can eat pizza, fast food, and processed foods and not gain. But, then again they are only hearing about the junk food and not the other 80% of the time of nutritious eating.christinev297 wrote: »I guess it may sometimes be seen as bragging?? "I eat all the junk I can fit into my calories". Obviously not in those exact words, but that is how it sometimes comes across.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I think one of the challenges is you're a active in shape individual that burns a bunch of calories. You or someone like yourself can get proper nutrition (your macros and micros) eating 80% nutritious. For someone on a lower calorie diet, it's going to be much more difficult to get needed nutrition if 20% of say 1500 calories come from candy, cakes, chips, ice cream, etc.
Well I can hit my macro requirements in 1200 calories if I chose to. Leaving the 20% (300 calories) for chips (85 cals), Ice cream (90 cals), cookies (72 cals) because I choose the ones I like (eg Walkers pops / Quavers - Solero / Fab, McVities Rich Tea)
And it's not like the less nutritiously rich foods you mention don't help with hitting macros too
But it's about choice - there's no reason why people can't manage it - even if it's difficult - if they choose to / if it's important to their wellbeing
Take a 1200 calorie diet to a registered dietician where 20% of the calories are from nutritionally less dense food (chips, cookies, candy, cake, etc) and get their thoughts .
Why would their thoughts matter? If you are hitting your macro requirements, it doesn't mater how your intake is made up.
so what is your thought on this statement @psulemon ?
does it fit with your 80/20 rule, or it is just me struggling again with reading comprehension?
I wasn't aware that psulemon was the translator of all posts on MFP and the one who determines if everyone's diet was appropriate for them. Wow that's a lot of responsibility @psulemon! You should ask them to double your mod salary!
Its ok. I am always willing to provide some perspective. And i got time right now while my wife is progressing during her labor.
Good luck with baby lemon!!!!
And to get back on topic, don't anyone try to take away my butter!
0 -
tristen_leigh wrote: »jofjltncb6 wrote: »tristen_leigh wrote: »Well this has been the most entertaining and informative thread ever.
Legit question since all the knowledgeable seem to gather here. Do macros not matter if I'm hitting my calorie goal for weight loss? Apologies if this has been answered... I gave up after 7 pages.
Define "not matter".
If you eat a diet of 100% of any one macro, you're going to have a bad time.
But if you go over your protein macro by 5% and under you carb by 5%? Almost certainly won't matter at all.
The ratios are somewhat arbitrary...and the default MFP ratios are terrible for many. I found great success with a diet of 30/20/50 p/c/f for a long while. Had I ate the same but changed my macros on the site to 25/40/35, it would have looked like I was missing my macros badly, but I still would have had the same level of success.
I'm not talking extremes by "not matter". I did a little research and adjusted macros accordingly (30/40/30). I seem to always be over my carbs but can usually stay within the range +/- about 5% for protein and fat.
I suspect most would say +/- 5% is totally fine (assuming reasonable targets) for most people. That's easily within error tolerances for most food log measurements anyhow. And if you ever see signs it isn't fine, then adjust accordingly.0 -
tristen_leigh wrote: »jofjltncb6 wrote: »tristen_leigh wrote: »Well this has been the most entertaining and informative thread ever.
Legit question since all the knowledgeable seem to gather here. Do macros not matter if I'm hitting my calorie goal for weight loss? Apologies if this has been answered... I gave up after 7 pages.
Define "not matter".
If you eat a diet of 100% of any one macro, you're going to have a bad time.
But if you go over your protein macro by 5% and under you carb by 5%? Almost certainly won't matter at all.
The ratios are somewhat arbitrary...and the default MFP ratios are terrible for many. I found great success with a diet of 30/20/50 p/c/f for a long while. Had I ate the same but changed my macros on the site to 25/40/35, it would have looked like I was missing my macros badly, but I still would have had the same level of success.
I'm not talking extremes by "not matter". I did a little research and adjusted macros accordingly (30/40/30). I seem to always be over my carbs but can usually stay within the range +/- about 5% for protein and fat.
What are your stats, what is your workout routine and total calories.
I am initial inclined to say you will be fine.
This - are you satisfied with your results week to week?0 -
Asher_Ethan wrote: »Lame... I just went through all 12 pages to see if OP ever came back because I really wanted to hear more about clean eating and empty calories.
I wanted to learn more about these 'special occasions' where I'm allowed to eat white food.
0 -
tracyannk28 wrote: »Asher_Ethan wrote: »Lame... I just went through all 12 pages to see if OP ever came back because I really wanted to hear more about clean eating and empty calories.
I wanted to learn more about these 'special occasions' where I'm allowed to eat white food.
only on days that end with y.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions