Overall Calories vs Individual Macros

Equus5374

I'd like some clarification/education on the correlation between overall calories and individual macros over a set period of time (a day, a week, long-term). I'm a little confused about this scenario:

If a person eats 1500 calories a day (just a random number, not my stats) and strictly maintains that over a set period, which is a calorie deficit for that person, but goes way over their fat macro each day (by 25% or more), will they gain weight?

My general question is essentially, what is more important in the overall picture, calories or macros? Just looking for some education, thanks.

yarwell

There are some protein and fats that you have to eat as you can't make them, so macros count.

If you are losing weight you're doing ok as long as you hit the minima. More fat isn't likely to be a problem.

juggernaut1974

Equus5374 wrote: »

I'd like some clarification/education on the correlation between overall calories and individual macros over a set period of time (a day, a week, long-term). I'm a little confused about this scenario:

If a person eats 1500 calories a day (just a random number, not my stats) and strictly maintains that over a set period, which is a calorie deficit for that person, but goes way over their fat macro each day (by 25% or more), will they gain weight?

With the necessary disclaimers about assuming they are measuring accurately and there are no confounding medical issues, if 1500 calories per day is a deficit, they will lose weight regardless of their macro breakdown.

My general question is essentially, what is more important in the overall picture, calories or macros? Just looking for some education, thanks.

My general answer is they are both important, but for different reasons.

For strictly weight loss; calories are of utmost importance.

Macros are very important for body composition issues, satiety, etc;

amusedmonkey

Some people eat 70% of their calories in fat, others do in carbs. Some have high protein diets, others have low protein diets. In all cases calories is what decides weight loss. Now what macros do is that some people feel more satisfied and hence able to stick to their diet better on a certain macro distribution, for me it's a diet heavy in carbs.

There is a minimum of protein necessary for your body to function correctly and to minimize muscle loss. There is also a minimum of fat that is recommended for some hormones to function correctly. There is a minimum of carbs as well to insure adequate fiber and micronutrient intake. As long as you hit the minimums you should be okay health-wise, and even if you don't you should be okay loss-wise.

Yi5hedr3

Both are important. Calories control weight, macros control TYPE of weight.

dhimaan

juggernaut1974 wrote: »

Equus5374 wrote: »

I'd like some clarification/education on the correlation between overall calories and individual macros over a set period of time (a day, a week, long-term). I'm a little confused about this scenario:

If a person eats 1500 calories a day (just a random number, not my stats) and strictly maintains that over a set period, which is a calorie deficit for that person, but goes way over their fat macro each day (by 25% or more), will they gain weight?

With the necessary disclaimers about assuming they are measuring accurately and there are no confounding medical issues, if 1500 calories per day is a deficit, they will lose weight regardless of their macro breakdown.

My general question is essentially, what is more important in the overall picture, calories or macros? Just looking for some education, thanks.

My general answer is they are both important, but for different reasons.

For strictly weight loss; calories are of utmost importance.

Macros are very important for body composition issues, satiety, etc;

This.