Why macros matter
Replies
-
muscleandbeard wrote: »
A lot. As a cop I work them ever couple of months. I see guys passing out within the first 10 miles. None of them look above 150lbsmuscleandbeard wrote: »AnabolicKyle wrote: »macros schmacros
just hit your minimum protein requirement for the day
I'll remember that as my training ramps up for my 6+ hour races this summer. Who needs carbs...
Well I'm yet to see a marathon runner that looks healthy and not underweight.
How many marathons have you attended? Based on the above comment I'll say zero.
And then there are the guys that are running the whole 26.2 faster than you can sprint.
But totes out of shape.0 -
Thoughts? Will Brink is well respected in the nutrition industry
Figuring Macronutrients The EASY Way!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uoBT-lju3Cw 0 -
AnabolicKyle wrote: »Lovee_Dove7 wrote: »
Why "A min target of protein?"
To avoid muscle loss while at a calorie deficit.Lovee_Dove7 wrote: »Thought experiment for you:
You are going to a world-televised beach party on the French coast with 12 supermodels. There will be photo sessions and competitions with other athletes for strength and endurance.
What will be your diet for the next two weeks? Will you be tightening up on that diet, paying attention to your macros so you will look and perform your best?
for 14 days I would eat nothing but protein probably about 250g(1000calories) to look as lean as possible.
Wait!
You're adjusting your macros.
You're using macros to obtain desired results. For looks in this case. I'm questioning your ability to compete in those strength and endurance competitions. You'll lose the contracts with Nike!0 -
Lovee_Dove7 wrote: »Wait!
You're adjusting your macros.
You're using macros to obtain desired results. For looks in this case. I'm questioning your ability to compete in those strength and endurance competitions. You'll lose the contracts with Nike!
Okay...
0 -
I don't think you know what that means.0
-
Curious to what defines an Elite athlete?0
-
AnabolicKyle wrote: »Both links provide no evidence which is pretty typical of any nutrition based "science". That doesn't mean they are wrong but it means their is no definite answer. No, it just means you reject their recommendations and the probability that there must be good reason why they recommend what they do. Maybe the minimum is 20g of fat or 60g of fat, I don't know. That's clear.
Two types of diets I have seen
The 90% carb diet. I forget the name. Some YouTube guy always brings it up.
Sounds idiotic and misinformed. What does it have to do with this?
The no carb diet Atkins paleo etc umm...that's three different diets. None of which we're discussing. What's your point?
My point is that as long as you eat some what normal diet all you need to lose fat is
1.calories in vs calories out this is ALL you need to lose fat
2.A min target of protein you can lose fat without minimum protein intake. You just won't retain as much muscle.
3.rule number one is king
Thought experiment
Macros matter!!!
What should my daily carb intake be? It depends on your goals, how you plan to get there and where you're starting
Why? Because different goals and methods require different macros for optimal results and no one starts from the same point
What should my daily fat intake be?
It depends on your goals, how you plan to get there and where you're starting
Why? Because different goals and methods require different macros for optimal results and no one starts from the same point
What should my daily protein intake be?
It depends on your goals, how you plan to get there and where you're starting
Why? Because different goals and methods require different macros for optimal results and no one starts from the same point
Here's another tidbit.
http://europepmc.org/abstract/med/10910295
0 -
@Carlos_421
The point is nobody knows optimal macro ratios so setting one is pointless like I said.
USDA used to recommend
smoking
low fat diet
low cholesterol diet (dont eat eggs)
eating trans fat (margarine)
etc etc etc
Macros schmacros0 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »
That study doesnt even have constant calories in both groups.
but even if it did, it doesnt matter. science is repeatable, which means they need repeatable studies to show certain macro ratios are better for health or fat loss or whatever.
Carlos i think youre missing my point and idea.
my distilled idea is this.
everyone needs some minimum amount of protein and fat to live.
nobody really knows what is best
hit the minimums and dont worry about macro ratios0 -
AnabolicKyle wrote: »@Carlos_421
The point is nobody knows optimal macro ratios so setting one is pointless like I said.
USDA used to recommend
smoking
low fat diet
low cholesterol diet (dont eat eggs)
eating trans fat (margarine)
etc etc etc
Macros schmacros
The point is macros will differ dependent on goals and we know a lot more about them now than we did in the eighties when the low fat trend was popular.
But since you don't trust the recommendations of well respected experts like Lyle McDonald and Dr Layne Norton as well as the research I provided on the affect on immune function in athletes (not to mention all the evidence we now have regarding the affect of fat intake on testosterone production), even attempting to set beneficial macro levels is completely useless.
Ok.0 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »AnabolicKyle wrote: »@Carlos_421
The point is nobody knows optimal macro ratios so setting one is pointless like I said.
USDA used to recommend
smoking
low fat diet
low cholesterol diet (dont eat eggs)
eating trans fat (margarine)
etc etc etc
Macros schmacros
The point is macros will differ dependent on goals and we know a lot more about them now than we did in the eighties when the low fat trend was popular.
But since you don't trust the recommendations of well respected experts like Lyle McDonald and Dr Layne Norton as well as the research I provided on the affect on immune function in athletes (not to mention all the evidence we now have regarding the affect of fat intake on testosterone production), even attempting to set beneficial macro levels is completely useless.
Ok.
I respect Lyle McDonald a lot!!!0 -
AnabolicKyle wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »AnabolicKyle wrote: »@Carlos_421
The point is nobody knows optimal macro ratios so setting one is pointless like I said.
USDA used to recommend
smoking
low fat diet
low cholesterol diet (dont eat eggs)
eating trans fat (margarine)
etc etc etc
Macros schmacros
The point is macros will differ dependent on goals and we know a lot more about them now than we did in the eighties when the low fat trend was popular.
But since you don't trust the recommendations of well respected experts like Lyle McDonald and Dr Layne Norton as well as the research I provided on the affect on immune function in athletes (not to mention all the evidence we now have regarding the affect of fat intake on testosterone production), even attempting to set beneficial macro levels is completely useless.
Ok.
I respect Lyle McDonald a lot!!!
His position is that there is no one defined macro ratio that is best for everyone (because "it depends" and because different people have had some level of success with different approaches).
Still, he recommends basic guidelines for setting macros and he suggests 20% from fat as an absolute bare minimum.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/macronutrient-intake-for-mass-gains-qa.html/0 -
AnabolicKyle wrote: »@Carlos_421
The point is nobody knows optimal macro ratios so setting one is pointless like I said.
USDA used to recommend
smoking
low fat diet
low cholesterol diet (dont eat eggs)
eating trans fat (margarine)
etc etc etc
Macros schmacros
You don't really have a point.
Macros are adjustable to benefit individual needs. They matter!0 -
Great read! Thanks for sharing
0 -
Thanks for the compliment!!!0
-
Wetcoaster wrote: »Thoughts? Will Brink is well respected in the nutrition industry
Figuring Macronutrients The EASY Way!
Did I mishear him, or did he say "one gram of protein for every pound of bodyweight"? For me that's over 200g - I can neither afford nor manage to eat that amount of steak!
It sounds like an awful lot, especially as MFP has me at around 80g/day, but I'm still trying to learn about all this stuff. Is that much protein really necessary?
0 -
Wetcoaster wrote: »Thoughts? Will Brink is well respected in the nutrition industry
Figuring Macronutrients The EASY Way!
Did I mishear him, or did he say "one gram of protein for every pound of bodyweight"? For me that's over 200g - I can neither afford nor manage to eat that amount of steak!
It sounds like an awful lot, especially as MFP has me at around 80g/day, but I'm still trying to learn about all this stuff. Is that much protein really necessary?
MFP recommendations for protein are typically very low.
.8-1 gram per pound of bodyweight is optimal as it will help to preserve muscle while in a deficit or to build muscle in a surplus (if you're lifting).
You won't die with half that, but your muscle retention won't be optimal.0 -
My understanding is that the .8 g per lb relates to estimated LBM and thus should be tied to a healthy or goal weight and not current weight if you have a good bit to lose still.
Here's a good source on protein also, with somewhat lower recommendations for many people (based on goal) -- not that it's bad to go over:
http://examine.com/faq/how-much-protein-do-i-need-every-day/0 -
Aha - thank you! That article suggests 0.8g or more per kilo, not per pound... makes more sense!
0 -
-
"or more", yep. Sounds like anything between 0.8 and 1.5 would be suitable in my circumstances, but I should base it on my goal weight and not current. That's the impression I got, anyway!
I am pretty sedentary at the moment, need to work up to being more active but I've made a start. I've been reading how you risk losing muscle as well as fat if you don't have enough protein (and do some strength training), so I wanted to be sure I was getting enough but not too much. Not that it feels like I have any muscle right now, but maybe it's hiding under the flab...
0 -
Aha - thank you! That article suggests 0.8g or more per kilo, not per pound... makes more sense!
Not for many people:If you are an athlete or highly active person currently attempting to lose body fat while preserving lean muscle mass, a daily intake of 1.5-2.2g/kg bodyweight (0.68-1g/lb bodyweight) would be a good target.
This is what I aim for.If you are an athlete or highly active person, or you are attempting to lose body fat while preserving lean mass, then a daily intake of 1.0-1.5g/kg bodyweight (0.45-0.68g/lb bodyweight) would be a good target.
This would apply to anyone trying to lose.
BUT:If you are obese, using a protein intake relative to body weight is a bad idea. Either calculate your lean mass (overall weight after subtracting fat mass, which can be calculated by body fat percentage) or use your goal/target weight for calculations.0 -
Just wanted to thank the OP for posting this. I've had so many arguments with my boyfriend about this, but now I understand better where he's coming from and why macros are important depending on a person's goals. I've always tried to reach my protein goals, and usually do, but only because I've always heard "protein is good". Now I'll be upping my daily protein goal. 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