Not getting enough calories but hitting fats/carbs/sugars too quickly

anniekin_skywalker

I'm finding that even when monitoring what I eat and opting for the high-protein, low-fat options I still find myself way below the calorie goal (often below 1,000 which I think is too low) yet my go-to fillers are either too high in fat or sugar and I exceed those too quickly. That's with fruits, nuts, yoghurt, etc.

I don't really know how to raise my calorie intake without going overboard on the macronutrients.

Any suggestions or tips on how you do it?

kgeyser

Can you open your diary? I'm having a hard time visualizing your question - your macros should be set to your calorie goal. Exceeding a macro isn't a big deal for weight loss, it's the calories that ultimately matter. But if you have your macros set to the default, it might not be appropriate for the way you eat and you might want to change the percentages so you don't find yourself going into the red.

Not being able to see your diary, it could also be a case of bad entries where the calorie/macro counts are off, which would explain being so far under in calories while still hitting macros.

auddii

I wouldn't bother tracking sugar. It's a flawed system; the goal is based off the WHO's recommendation for added sugar, but the system can't figure out the difference between added sugar and natural sugar. So, it's a low limit because it only reflects added sugar, but eating fruit will push you past that limit easily (even though it shouldn't count towards the limit at all).

So, I dropped sugar entirely; instead, I track fiber now. I think it's a better stat.

My guess is, that would actually solve a lot of your problems, but I agree, you'll get better advice if you open your diary.

sllm1

Increase lower fat protein sources - do you eat chicken?

diannethegeek

It's okay to go over on fat or carbs, as long as those aren't pushing out other important nutrients (ie, protein). Think of MFP's macro goals more as guidelines rather than hard and fast rules.

cwolfman13

My guess is that you probably have a lot of erroneous entries...macros are what make up you calories...if you're hitting your macros, you're hitting your calories...which again suggest that you are using some erroneous entries from the database.

lynn_glenmont

So what you're saying is that you set your macro goals for a high protein diet, but you don't actually eat a high protein diet? The first thing you need to do is decide whether you really want to be eating a high protein diet. Do you have a reason for doing so, or did you just read some random blog post that made you want to try it? If it's what you want to do, you have to actually eat foods that fit those parameters, not a diet that relies on

go-to fillers [that] are either too high in fat or sugar.

lemurcat12

What are the precise numbers you are getting: carbs, fat, protein, calories? In grams, not percentage.

I think it's 3 possible things:

(1) Erroneous entries;

(2) You are focusing on percentage, not grams -- those are going to go up and down throughout the day and don't really matter;

or (3) You are way low on protein.

Could also be that you are worrying about small differences and, in any case, while working on hitting the protein goal (unless you set a custom goal that is unreasonably high) is a good thing over time, it's much more important to get enough calories than avoid going over carbs or fat or sugar, none of which matters much and not for weight loss at all.

owensy12

anniekin_skywalker wrote: »

I'm finding that even when monitoring what I eat and opting for the high-protein, low-fat options I still find myself way below the calorie goal (often below 1,000 which I think is too low) yet my go-to fillers are either too high in fat or sugar and I exceed those too quickly. That's with fruits, nuts, yoghurt, etc.

I don't really know how to raise my calorie intake without going overboard on the macronutrients.

Any suggestions or tips on how you do it?

Try and avoid low-fat foods (or at least read the labels), especially low-dat dairy, as it can contain far more sugar than the full-fat equivalent. I use full fat greek yoghurt and whole/full fat milk, and it keeps me fuller for longer. Don't worry about the sugar in whole fruits.

anniekin_skywalker

kgeyser wrote: »

Can you open your diary? I'm having a hard time visualizing your question - your macros should be set to your calorie goal. Exceeding a macro isn't a big deal for weight loss, it's the calories that ultimately matter. But if you have your macros set to the default, it might not be appropriate for the way you eat and you might want to change the percentages so you don't find yourself going into the red.

Not being able to see your diary, it could also be a case of bad entries where the calorie/macro counts are off, which would explain being so far under in calories while still hitting macros.

Done - here's the key: mfp-may

Thanks for the input, everyone. Admittedly some places it's hard to get the correct info but for the most part (specifically with lunches) I check the websites or packaging as well so I don't think it's a case of too many erroneous entries.

I try get as much protein as I can, mostly to keep my energy levels up and stay full (I have no idea what I'm doing, really) but I'm not too concious of the carbs. It's the sugars and fat specifically that I find are constantly being exceeded.

DaddieCat

Personally, I see a lot of room for inaccuracy in your logging.

You're logging things in portions, serving sizes, etc.

In order to really get a handle on your actual intake, it's highly advisable to acquire a food scale and log everything solid in grams. This will give you a better, more accurate understanding of what you are taking in.

That said, you're doing fine on macros, although I'd personally make sure to eat up to or over the protein and fat goals, fill the rest with carbs, and ignore the sugar... substitute it for fiber or something unless you have a medical reason to track it.

I'm guessing, just based on your logging, that you are eating more than you think. I don't know where you are located, but in the US, serving sizes on packages are often not what the package actually contains. For example, a package of crisps can contain up to 20% more than the label says it does as long as it's not under the printed weight. US rules and regulations allow for that 20% and companies often take advantage of it, since the packaging equipment isn't very precise to begin with, and coming in under will cause large fines to be levied against them. They would rather lost the money on the slight to moderate overfill than deal with the fines since they are not only quite steep, but on a per case basis (every package that contains less incites a new fine).

I often log things in serving sizes, but that's because I've weighed out the amount that the package states a serving is.

Just my two cents.

shagerty777

Think about it this way, 1 gram of carbs is 4 calories, 1 gram of protein is also 4 calories but 1 gram of fat is 9 calories. That is what makes it important not to run too far over on fat if you are trying to lose weight. Keep playing around and meticulously tracking and you'll get there!!

ktilton70130

auddii wrote: »

I wouldn't bother tracking sugar. It's a flawed system; the goal is based off the WHO's recommendation for added sugar, but the system can't figure out the difference between added sugar and natural sugar. So, it's a low limit because it only reflects added sugar, but eating fruit will push you past that limit easily (even though it shouldn't count towards the limit at all).

So, I dropped sugar entirely; instead, I track fiber now. I think it's a better stat.

My guess is, that would actually solve a lot of your problems, but I agree, you'll get better advice if you open your diary.

I love your suggestion of dropping the sugar macro, because I usually go over my sugar. However I looked my diary over and see the sugar came from fruit and yogurt.

lemurcat12

owensy12 wrote: »

anniekin_skywalker wrote: »

I'm finding that even when monitoring what I eat and opting for the high-protein, low-fat options I still find myself way below the calorie goal (often below 1,000 which I think is too low) yet my go-to fillers are either too high in fat or sugar and I exceed those too quickly. That's with fruits, nuts, yoghurt, etc.

I don't really know how to raise my calorie intake without going overboard on the macronutrients.

Any suggestions or tips on how you do it?

Try and avoid low-fat foods (or at least read the labels), especially low-dat dairy, as it can contain far more sugar than the full-fat equivalent. I use full fat greek yoghurt and whole/full fat milk, and it keeps me fuller for longer. Don't worry about the sugar in whole fruits.

It is false that sugar is added to low fat dairy. I don't know why people think that.

From the USDA:

100 g of yogurt, greek, plain, nonfat=59 calories, 10.2 g protein, 0 g fat (obv), 3.6 g carbs (3.2 g sugar).

100 g of yogurt, greek, plain, lowfat=73 calories, 10.0 g protein, 1.9 g fat, 3.9 g carbs (3.6 g sugar).

100 g of yogurt, greek, plain, whole milk=97 calories, 9 g protein, 5 g fat, 4 g carbs (4 g sugar).

Not sure why it sugar even went up a bit, but skimming out the fat shouldn't effect sugar content and does not increase it. It is a higher percentage of total calories, since the calories from the fat is removed. Also, there's no reason to avoid lactose anyway.

I think fullfat dairy is a great choice is someone likes it better or finds it more filling. I do not find it more filling and don't like it better (I just tried fullfat cottage cheese again, a delicious brand from a local farm, and I still find the lowfat just as tasty, so I can't justify wasting calories I could be using on cheeses or butter or some other fat I enjoy more on fullfat cottage cheese).

lemurcat12

OP, looking at your diary, your macros look fine. Others are giving good advice about logging. Think of the macros as more of a guideline, not something you must never go over.

anniekin_skywalker

Thank you all! I'm in the UK BTW. What's mentioned about sugar makes a lot of sense, so I'll try not to focus so much on that.