Confused. Help!
meg_mindbody
Posts: 23 Member
So I'm a bit confused, as essentially the bulk of what I have been reading on MFP suggests that counting calories is the best way to see weight loss. However, I just had a somewhat disheartening fitness consultation with a trainer, and was told that for optimum results re: losing weight, I need to track macros. I'm not sure why, but my automatic thought was that this will be harder for me to do. Is it? and is this a better method to see weight loss results?
1
Replies
-
meg_mindbody wrote: »So I'm a bit confused, as essentially the bulk of what I have been reading on MFP suggests that counting calories is the best way to see weight loss. However, I just had a somewhat disheartening fitness consultation with a trainer, and was told that for optimum results re: losing weight, I need to track macros. I'm not sure why, but my automatic thought was that this would be harder to track. Is it? and is this essentially a better way to see weight loss results?
Calories are king.13 -
Chef_Barbell wrote: »meg_mindbody wrote: »So I'm a bit confused, as essentially the bulk of what I have been reading on MFP suggests that counting calories is the best way to see weight loss. However, I just had a somewhat disheartening fitness consultation with a trainer, and was told that for optimum results re: losing weight, I need to track macros. I'm not sure why, but my automatic thought was that this would be harder to track. Is it? and is this essentially a better way to see weight loss results?
Calories are king.
I'm so confused now! Haha. She didn't say to completely disregard calories, but is what she's saying to track macros in order to keep track of where my calories are coming from??1 -
I've lost 90lbs only tracking calories not macros. I wouldn't worry too much4
-
Did you ask why the trainer wanted you to track macros? Did the trainer give you a goal? What training/qualifications does this person hold to make the advice credible?0
-
The only way to lose weight is to eat less calories per day than you burn. Counting is IMO the best way to ensure this happens. If weight loss is all you are concerned about, calorie counting is all you need to do.meg_mindbody wrote: »So I'm a bit confused, as essentially the bulk of what I have been reading on MFP suggests that counting calories is the best way to see weight loss. However, I just had a somewhat disheartening fitness consultation with a trainer, and was told that for optimum results re: losing weight, I need to track macros. I'm not sure why, but my automatic thought was that this will be harder for me to do. Is it? and is this a better method to see weight loss results?
If you care about your body composition, counting macros helps a great deal. Making sure you get adequate protein and fat each day can help you have a better physique once you lose the desired amount of weight. It's not complicated at all and MFP already tracks macros for you. The key is to not make it super strict and try and hit each macros down to the gram. It's far easier to simply have your calorie goal, let's say 1800 just for the purposes of this discussion. Every day you need to eat 1800 or less calories. In doing so you should try and make sure you hit X grams of protein and Y grams of fat. That's it. Hit your protein goal, your fat goal, and stay under your calorie limit. Now what should X and Y be? Well, I usually tell people protein should be about 0.6-0.8 grams a day per lb you weigh and fat should be 0.35 grams per lb you weigh. Now remember, those are minimums, you can exceed them so long as you stay under your calorie goal. Eat at least X grams of protein, eat at least Y grams of fat, and eat whatever else you want to stay under 1800 calories. Does that make sense?
13 -
MFP tracks your macros for you, so you can see how you're doing on that score. Keep in mind that different people find that different macro splits work best for them in terms of satiety. I find that when I hit my protein (or come close) I feel fuller. I'm vegetarian and there are carbs in a lot of my protein sources. It's one macro I usually exceed target on. I tend to come in at around 50-60% of my fat target. It's something I keep an eye on, because fat helps the body absorb certain nutrients, but so far, I don't feel like anything is missing or lacking.
There are people who do well on low-carb, high-protein or low-carb, high fat. It depends on the person and the person's goals. (Mine are to hit a healthy BMI while holding onto as much muscle as I can in the process.) I've dropped almost 70 lbs so far, mostly focused on calories and protein. And iron; my hemoglobin is a little low.
You'll probably find, as you track calories and find the foods that give you energy and satiety, that you'll naturally hit a certain macro split that may or may not be what MFP gave you.3 -
It's not harder to do. If you are using MFP to track macros, it will show you the calories as well. Either way, you are tracking both. I would ask your trainer his/her reason behind that. It's good to make sure you are getting enough macros, but calories are what you need to concentrate on to lose weight. Don't just take his/her word for it with no understanding of it. Have him/her educate you. That's what you are paying for. If you get some ambiguous answer, I would find another trainer.1
-
MFP tracks your macros (carbs protein fats) using the food diary. it will make it a lot easier for you. you'll be able to see if your carbs are too high or if you are falling short on your protein goal.
still calorie tracking makes the biggest difference. i only really look at meeting protein and keeping fat/carbs under
My understanding of the macros are carbs are used easiest by the body for energy, so a high carb diet could greatly slow fat loss. and protein is good for maintaining your muscles and also for providing you a full feeling even when you may not have had much. i'm sure there's much more to it but those are the main points i have taken from so far9 -
If carbs are used most easily, how does that slow fat loss? Dietary fat isn't the same as stored body fat.1
-
I can only share my experience with macros and calories. My macro (goals) were / are 15% sugar/carbs; 45% protein; 40% fat (healthy ones); my calorie goal is 1400. I am 59, 5'6" and weighed 190-ish last November. I now hover between 157 lbs and 155 lbs. This is also my "maintenance" regimen. I am still losing, just more slowly.
This combo of macros doesn't use "carbs" for fuel it uses your body fat instead; this is called ketosis. Even if you don't actually stay in ketosis it still works, at least it did for me.
This way of eating is called "keto" or sometimes paleo. They are similar - but not exactly the same.
Generally, I am not hungry. I seem to be able to stay within my nutrition / calorie goals and I FEEL better. No aches, pains and I have lost almost 40 lbs almost without trying. While I like it and how I feel, long term going under 100 carbs a day is not good for you according to some nutritionists.
To tell you the truth, I didn't really exercise, i was compliant only about 75% with both my macros and my calories (I went over, just not by a whole lot, and when I went way over it was maybe twice a month).
It works for some people and doesn't for others. People who are on it are passionate about it and people who are not are just as passionate as to why they think it's horrible. It's not easy to do at first and I did it with the first meal of the day the first week, then my second meal of the day the second week and then the third week, I worked to incorporate low carb / paleo recipes into the family dinners or just cut way down on eh carbs I put in food or ate myself.
I had no carb flu really... and I make up my meals for the work week on Sundays when i cook the main family dinner.8 -
If you're tracking macros, you're inadvertently tracking calories. ~4kcal/g of carbs and protein. ~9kcal/g of fat. Macro grams x appropriate macro calorie, add the total sum of each macro category = total calories. If it's less than what your body needs, you will be in an energy/calorie deficit and lose. If it's the same you'll be in an energy balance aka maintenance. If it's more, you're in an energy/calorie surplus and gain.3
-
Weight loss is entirely about energy balance and calories are a measure of energy. If you eat fewer calories than you burn, your body will use up it's fat stores to make up the difference. It really is that simple. Getting adequate protein and fats are beneficial for other reasons but weight loss comes down to maintaining a calorie deficit.5
-
The only way to lose weight is to eat less calories per day than you burn. Counting is IMO the best way to ensure this happens. If weight loss is all you are concerned about, calorie counting is all you need to do.meg_mindbody wrote: »So I'm a bit confused, as essentially the bulk of what I have been reading on MFP suggests that counting calories is the best way to see weight loss. However, I just had a somewhat disheartening fitness consultation with a trainer, and was told that for optimum results re: losing weight, I need to track macros. I'm not sure why, but my automatic thought was that this will be harder for me to do. Is it? and is this a better method to see weight loss results?
If you care about your body composition, counting macros helps a great deal. Making sure you get adequate protein and fat each day can help you have a better physique once you lose the desired amount of weight. It's not complicated at all and MFP already tracks macros for you. The key is to not make it super strict and try and hit each macros down to the gram. It's far easier to simply have your calorie goal, let's say 1800 just for the purposes of this discussion. Every day you need to eat 1800 or less calories. In doing so you should try and make sure you hit X grams of protein and Y grams of fat. That's it. Hit your protein goal, your fat goal, and stay under your calorie limit. Now what should X and Y be? Well, I usually tell people protein should be about 0.6-0.8 grams a day per lb you weigh and fat should be 0.35 grams per lb you weigh. Now remember, those are minimums, you can exceed them so long as you stay under your calorie goal. Eat at least X grams of protein, eat at least Y grams of fat, and eat whatever else you want to stay under 1800 calories. Does that make sense?
Yes. Thank you so much!1 -
If your trainer has recommended a particular macro split, you can override MFP's default and enter your trainer's values. It might be easier for you if you set that up. You do this in the goals tab.0
-
this shouldn't be any more difficult than just tracking calories. tracking macros... is tracking calories.
Set your macro goal to whatever split your trainer suggested (it's probably 40/30/30) with your calorie goal under settings and then you're good to go.
I would say as a general rule of thumb you want to reach your protein and fat goal as these are essential and then your carbs can be played with depending on your preference and energy needs.6 -
This is crazy but do some searching on ketogenics.or the keto diet. Your body can either burn sugar (ie carbs) or it can burn fat. Ketosis is where your body changes and converts to burning fat. To get this you have to follow macros and not really worry about cal.s. if you do this diet you can experience the keto flu which is withdrawal of sugars. After you hit ketosis, you loose weight quickly. This is without even working out. Lots of ways to eat GOOD food without carbs or sugar. Check it out.12
-
mcdanieljj wrote: »This is crazy but do some searching on ketogenics.or the keto diet. Your body can either burn sugar (ie carbs) or it can burn fat. Ketosis is where your body changes and converts to burning fat. To get this you have to follow macros and not really worry about cal.s. if you do this diet you can experience the keto flu which is withdrawal of sugars. After you hit ketosis, you loose weight quickly. This is without even working out. Lots of ways to eat GOOD food without carbs or sugar. Check it out.
You lose weight quickly because you deplete glycogen in your muscle tissue which is bound to water in a ratio of 3 to 1. This shouldn't be confused with fat loss.
Regardless of fuel source (from sugar or fat) your body will still follow energy balance. meaning, regardless of whether you're in ketosis or not you will still lose the same amount of (net) fat that you would based on the number of calories you're consuming.
Some individuals find keto to work best for them for hunger, dietary control, etc. but it is not superior in any way to a balanced diet and has it's own set of potential issues.
I know you're probably just trying to be helpful and are suggesting this based on your understanding of the keto diet, i just think it's important to note that it doesn't work that way.13 -
Calories are def the most important part to lose weight. Be in a deficit. Having your macros set up will be even better. It will help you portion out what ur body needs and still counting your calories. I am 60 pounds down in 9 months counting calories and tracking macros1
-
Adjusting your macros may make weight loss easier for you. It can help improve your health too.0
-
It's sorta the same thing. Paying attention to macros and macro goals will help you avoid too many empty calories. While you could lose weight meeting your calorie goals with (exaggeration) ice cream all day, I doubt you went to a trainer to eat like that. She should set you some goals to reach each day.2
-
mcdanieljj wrote: »This is crazy but do some searching on ketogenics.or the keto diet. Your body can either burn sugar (ie carbs) or it can burn fat. Ketosis is where your body changes and converts to burning fat. To get this you have to follow macros and not really worry about cal.s. if you do this diet you can experience the keto flu which is withdrawal of sugars. After you hit ketosis, you loose weight quickly. This is without even working out. Lots of ways to eat GOOD food without carbs or sugar. Check it out.
Calories do count even on Keto. You can definitely gain on keto if you overeat! And it's easy to overeat than your deficit because the calories that come from fat are quite high.4 -
Not an expert - and recently swapped to MFP from Weight Watchers.
I track calories and keep an eye on macros. (Carbs / fat/ protein). I'm finding that upping the protein helps me feel fuller - 'better day'. Also I can eat some full fat products and lose weight - if I'm within calories. (I think Fat had become a no no). So looking at macros whilst within calorie allowance is changing the foods I eat.
Also getting useful advice from other people - so my advice to you is keeping asking questions.1 -
mcdanieljj wrote: »This is crazy but do some searching on ketogenics.or the keto diet. Your body can either burn sugar (ie carbs) or it can burn fat. Ketosis is where your body changes and converts to burning fat. To get this you have to follow macros and not really worry about cal.s. if you do this diet you can experience the keto flu which is withdrawal of sugars. After you hit ketosis, you loose weight quickly. This is without even working out. Lots of ways to eat GOOD food without carbs or sugar. Check it out.
So, OP has joined MFP and hired a trainer. Said trainer has given her advice that may be a little more complicated than necessary, but isn't totally irrational based on what she's told us.
Your advice is that she should blow that all up (except maybe MFP) without trying it, and adopt an eating regimen that is even more complex, is very difficult to comply with for some people, but is satiating and helpful for some?
Okay, then.
OP, I vote with the idea of using MFP to track calories and macros; set the trainer's macro suggestions in your MFP profile along with a sensible, moderate weight loss goal rate; try eating to those goals for 4-6 weeks without being obsessive about it (putting the higher priority on calories); and see how it goes.
If you have any negative symptoms within that time - like fatigue or weakness or binges - make a change, otherwise stick with it and be patient.
If hunger is a problem, keto is one of many possible strategies you could consider for the next phase. It works well for some, poorly for others.1 -
Wow, not sure why anyone would take that as a negative comment. I was just saying it is working for me and there is research that shows benefits for people with insulin issues. Even has been used for people with seizures. Just thought I'd give my 2 cents.0
-
mcdanieljj wrote: »Wow, not sure why anyone would take that as a negative comment. I was just saying it is working for me and there is research that shows benefits for people with insulin issues. Even has been used for people with seizures. Just thought I'd give my 2 cents.
the OP hasn't indicated that she has insulin issues and yes, keto originally was for children with epilepsy back in the 60/70's....
but that doesn't mean it works for everyone and I've seen some research to indicate that a keto diet could have a negative affect on your thyroid - so its not something that you should just start doing
additionally, the problem is that keto is the current "solution" to anyones weight issues0 -
mcdanieljj wrote: »Wow, not sure why anyone would take that as a negative comment. I was just saying it is working for me and there is research that shows benefits for people with insulin issues. Even has been used for people with seizures. Just thought I'd give my 2 cents.
It was not taken as negative per se--just an inaccurate comment that needed to be corrected.
2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 423 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions