Changed macros
Options
xshandyx
Posts: 26 Member
Found a sight, and re did my macro goals..I think maybe my fats were just off and my protein.. Swapped it around, now my fats higher than my protein..
Let's see if I start losing bit quicker
Let's see if I start losing bit quicker
1
Replies
-
Fat 100g
carbs 17g
protein 88g
Calories 13500 -
I am 60 yrs old, 70kg, 5ft7in, in maintenance. Here are mine:
carbs 37g
fat 116g
protein 74g
cals 1,488 (often go over a bit)1 -
I'm in it for weight loss.. I have 30% deficit0
-
Typically fat is lower than protein in grams but higher in total calories on a body fat loss keto diet. I mean, fat is the energy you want to burn, but from your body. Not your plate. That doesn’t mean you eat low fat though.
Those macros may work out just fine. Give it a try.1 -
@Sunny_Bunny_, can you explain that chart above?0
-
My TDEE is 1700 (20C/60P/155F) and if I under eat or create a deficit I stall. As long as I fast or feast I lose like crazy. Consuming less calories slows your basal metabolism. I follow a page where they did an experiment to see if they could eat unlimited fat and still lose weight. 3500cals and they lost weight.0
-
So you eat at the calorie amount it would take to maintain your current weight (TDEE) and still lose weight? How long have you been doing this and how much weight have you lost? How did you determine your 1700 TDEE?hesterific wrote: »My TDEE is 1700 (20C/60P/155F) and if I under eat or create a deficit I stall. As long as I fast or feast I lose like crazy. Consuming less calories slows your basal metabolism. I follow a page where they did an experiment to see if they could eat unlimited fat and still lose weight. 3500cals and they lost weight.
0 -
So you eat at the calorie amount it would take to maintain your current weight (TDEE) and still lose weight? How long have you been doing this and how much weight have you lost? How did you determine your 1700 TDEE?
Yes. I am down 20 but down way more in inches, my size reflects more like 30lbs knowing my body like I do and the way I fit into old clothes. I've been keto for 2.5 mos but had a 3+ week stall due to an accidental 500 daily calorie deficit. I'm strict, no IIFYM, I read everything.
Tdeecalculator.net no deficit.0 -
@hesterific Your TDEE of 1700: is that your TDEE at your current weight? Or is your TDEE 1700 at your goal weight? If not too personal, how much of a difference is there between your current weight and your goal weight?
I'm asking because I've always thought it would be a reasonable approach to lose weight at the amount of calories for maintenance TDEE. It would be a lesser deficit over time but I'd still lose, just more slowly. I've been maintaining (~goal) for ~3.5 years so it is not currently relevant to me.
I guess my next question is: if you are currently eating at your TDEE for you actual current weight (and not your goal weight) and are losing weight, what is your next step when you reach goal weight?1 -
@hesterific Your TDEE of 1700: is that your TDEE at your current weight? Or is your TDEE 1700 at your goal weight? If not too personal, how much of a difference is there between your current weight and your goal weight?
I'm asking because I've always thought it would be a reasonable approach to lose weight at the amount of calories for maintenance TDEE. It would be a lesser deficit over time but I'd still lose, just more slowly. I've been maintaining (~goal) for ~3.5 years so it is not currently relevant to me.
I guess my next question is: if you are currently eating at your TDEE for you actual current weight (and not your goal weight) and are losing weight, what is your next step when you reach goal weight?
I don't mind answering, you have great questions!
I calculate based on current weight (no deficit). I recalculate at 10lb loss intervals.
My goal is 28lbs away.
I will likely surpass my goal weight and will need to reassess once I get there. Add more healthy carbs from veggies and up my protein, likely. I don't believe my husband will like snuggling up to bones.
During the 3 weeks per month I lose (I never lose a thing during shark week. I also don't gain, which seems different compared to other women) I lose consistently. I was insulin resistant when I started, I was also consuming hidden sugars daily so I had a rough start. My losses would be much more impressive over my 2.5mo adventure without that almost 4wk stall and the 2 weeks in the beginning when I was drinking Torani SF syrup, eating dextrose filled brats and sausages, etc.0 -
OK. I'll just go with the idea that as you are losing weight, you are reducing calories in order to continue to lose. Correct? Your additional information of "recalculating every 10 pounds" means you are periodically readjusting calories down. Down being the operative word there. Calories are being adjusted downward overall as you continue to lose. Correct?
I could argue/debate that the calories you are eating are neither MAINTENANCE TDEE nor MAINTENANCE calories because you are not maintaining, but rather you are losing and continuing to lose with each continued adjustment. I am in the camp of one has to be in a deficit in order to lose weight and your continued reduction of calories creates a continued deficit...in my mind.
BUT what is in my mind really DOESN"T MATTER. What I call it or you call it. Maintenance calories or deficit calories. What matters is you are losing unwanted weight. It is good you have also found that dropping the Torani, detrose, etc has had a positive impact on your weight loss. I never seemed to have problem with them (lost fine while using them) but I have read where many folks are very negatively effected by them in regards to weight management.
And when you say above that when you reach your desired weight you will (likely) "add more healthy carbs from veggies and up your protein"...you mean substitute/replace some of the calories from fat with these carbs and protein calories versus add more calories of veggie carbs and proteins. Because you will be eating at a calorie amount to maintain your goal weight. Correct?
1 -
hesterific wrote: »My TDEE is 1700 (20C/60P/155F) and if I under eat or create a deficit I stall. As long as I fast or feast I lose like crazy. Consuming less calories slows your basal metabolism. I follow a page where they did an experiment to see if they could eat unlimited fat and still lose weight. 3500cals and they lost weight.
If you're losing weight then you are eating at a deficit. If you were eating your maintenance/TDEE calories, then you would be maintaining your weight.
Perhaps your true TDEE is higher than 1700 calories. Online calculators are estimates, not set in stone.0 -
This is an interesting angle. Are you suggesting that I am not a 5'3" 41 yr old female who doesn't exercise? I am not at a caloric deficit, I eat 1700 calories, 155g are fat. We are not in the same camp, caloric deficits cause the body to save and stall. We will have to agree to disagree, my friend. If this wasn't working for me I would certainly entertain your ideas but I have seen too many people stalled in their journeys, experiencing hair loss or other secondary system failures, looking for help. Ketogenic Success on fb is a wonderful group. "Absolutely, post your macros." Stalled user then posts macros, admin responds, "Your calories are far too low. If you do not up your calories you body will continue to hold on to everything. Up your calories, report back." Sure enough it's usually the issue. Sometimes it's nuts or dairy but usually it's because people have reduced their basal metabolism by starving their systems.
If I wanted to have a calorie restricted diet, I might as well join Weight Watchers. Same loss in the beginning, same stall and feelings of failure to follow.
Awesome back and forth today, thank you!
1 -
You seem to be alluding to the 'starvation mode" myth, correct? If so, can you please explain how anorexics continue to lose weight while eating incredibly low calories?1
-
I'm not sure why differing opinions opens the door for aggressive challenges, as I said if this wasn't working for me I would entertain your suggestion. Maybe I can just leave this here for you to read?
https://www.ketovangelist.com/the-calorie-hypothesis/1 -
I hope everyone remembers where we ARE and where we are NOT.
6 -
DianaElena76 wrote: »@Sunny_Bunny_, can you explain that chart above?
As I understand it the chart shows the ratio of protein to other macros in grams you want to aim for depending on your goal.
So if fat loss is your goal you want to eat a 2:1 or 3:1 ratio of protein to everything else.
Now, that’s not to say that you wouldn’t do great with slightly less protein and more fat but the basic idea this is representing is that you want to adjust your fat and carb intake to suit your goal. Protein is less of a variable as far as weight loss or gain goes. It’s not a good energy source. Your body would burn body fat before it would start burning protein for energy so you can generally eat more calories if they are mostly protein and not so much fat or carbs.
The PSMF part of the chart is generally a very short term and quite low calorie crash diet. Meant for only a few days with maintenance level eating other days.
It also shows examples of actual foods that naturally contain the ratios explained for each section as reference.1 -
As far as the calorie discussion goes. It all comes down to fat flux.
Weather you’re in fat influx or fat efflux. You can call it calories or magic moonbeams but it’s the flux that matters.
Without any doubt, if a person is losing fat mass they are in fat efflux. More fat is leaving the cells than is being re-esterified back into the cells.
Of course fat isn’t the only thing we can lose that will create scale weight loss and a smaller appearance. I personally believe I lost a decent amount of muscle when I first went keto.
But anyway, if you truly want to understand what creates fat loss you will want to study this.
http://eatingacademy.com/weight-loss/how-to-make-a-fat-cell-less-not-thin-the-lessons-of-fat-flux1 -
Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »As far as the calorie discussion goes. It all comes down to fat flux.
Weather you’re in fat influx or fat efflux. You can call it calories or magic moonbeams but it’s the flux that matters.
Without any doubt, if a person is losing fat mass they are in fat efflux. More fat is leaving the cells than is being re-esterified back into the cells.
Of course fat isn’t the only thing we can lose that will create scale weight loss and a smaller appearance. I personally believe I lost a decent amount of muscle when I first went keto.
But anyway, if you truly want to understand what creates fat loss you will want to study this.
http://eatingacademy.com/weight-loss/how-to-make-a-fat-cell-less-not-thin-the-lessons-of-fat-flux
Thanks for sharing this. I enjoy Dr. Attia's blog. As I read it, it's his assertion in this blog post that some people in ketosis can lose weight (fat) without creating a deficit, but I think he believes this to be a smaller proportion of people, while more people need to create a deficit (presumably from reducing intake of dietary fat) in order to lose weight/fat.
For me personally, I find I need to create a deficit in order to lose, which I do by reducing grams of fat consumed (while keeping my carbs under 20 grams and my protein at 60 grams). It's what works for me. I think everyone has to find the right balance for them as an individual through some amount of trial.2 -
It was a long read to get to his last point that nutritional ketosis is not the answer for everyone to lose body fat. Don't want to read the entire article? Here's the last paragraph so you can skip all of his algebraic equations. As he indicated, people lose on a high carb Ornish Diet also. He hypothysizes that it is because the Ornish Diet is low glycemic. Nothing new there. As he also stated, the reason he could have lost fat, though he was not in a deficit, is because of his high level of exercise. Certainly nothing new there. And then of course he mentioned the occasional few who are able to lose weight (which includes body fat...the fat efflux) without a deficit and without exercise. Yes it is a phenomenon that does seem to exist. At least that is my interpretation of the article.
His last paragraph of the article:
"Many people who enter nutritional ketosis do so, I worry, because they believe it “guarantees” fat loss. I hope I have convinced you that this is not true. Nutritional ketosis is one eating strategy to facilitate negative fat flux, and it works very well if done correctly. It comes with some advantages and some disadvantages, just like other eating strategies. When I get back to the series on ketosis, I will address these, but for now I felt it was very important to put things in perspective a bit. Furthermore, I am convinced that it is not the ideal eating strategy for everyone".
My N=1 is I got my negative fat flux via low carb eating with a calorie deficit. My other N=1 is that being in a state of nutritional ketosis (post scale weight loss) has not automatically created a negative fat flux though that is not my reason for eating as I do. I guess I'm about average as one can get. YMMV. Find your N=1. There is no one true way.1
