Thoughts on macros vs. cico.

TristaJ80

What are your thoughts on macros vs. cico? I’ve tracked both ways, so I’m sure it comes down to preference.
If you do cico, do you eat back some of your exercise calories?

jdlobb

In what way? The sum of macros is calories. All calories are associated with some macro.

Unless you’re only tracking 1 or 2 macros, and not limiting the other(s) at all.

Cbean08

By tracking macros, you are tracking calories since calories make up macros. However, if you just count calories, you're not necessarily tracking macros.

It depends on what your goals on and which you prefer to focus on. Some people don't want to be restricted to certain macros everyday so they do cico. But I think it's important to make sure your body is getting enough of each macro for ideal performance.

VintageFeline

Macros vs CICO has been addressed above.

Exercise calories should always be accounted for in some way. If using MFP as intended then yes, you should eat at least some of your exercise calories. MFP activity settings are to be selected excluding purposeful exercise. If you are using an external TDEE calculator then that already has exercise factored in (assuming you've chosen the correct level of exercise) and so you shouldn't add exercise calories on top.

With both ways you should track the trend of your weight over a couple of months and adjust as necessary.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

TristaJ80

Thanks everyone!

WinoGelato

Whether you are tracking macros, counting calories, eating a particular way like LCHF or HCLF, vegan, paleo or all things in moderation... the impact on your weight still comes from CICO.

If you are losing, CI<CO
If you are maintaining CI=CO
If you are gaining, CI>CO

JeromeBarry1

Macros are carbs, fat, and protein. I like protein. Calories are a fixed target, except it moves when I log exercise.
So, I try to hit the protein macro and remain within my calorie budget.

lemurcat12

I don't see them as inconsistent. I usually watch macros, but calories are most important for weight loss. Macros are a tool to determine how to spend those calories.

If I calculate my calorie amount by including planned exercise, there is no reason to eat back exercise. This is what I normally do.

If I calculate calorie amount without assuming any exercise (which is what MFP does), then I would eat back exercise, at least anything significant.

jjpptt2

Depends on how you treat macros.

- If they are minimums, then it's easy to go over macros and thus go over calories, too.
- If you treat them as targets, then as long as they are reasonable, they should be OK.
- If you treat them as maximums, than you can end up underfed.


IMO:

- calories should be viewed as the determining factor for weight gain/loss/maintenance
- macros should be viewed as the determining factor for body composition, athletic performance, and satiety/personal preference.

mmapags

jjpptt2 wrote: »

Depends on how you treat macros.

- If they are minimums, then it's easy to go over macros and thus go over calories, too.
- If you treat them as targets, then as long as they are reasonable, they should be OK.
- If you treat them as maximums, than you can end up underfed.


IMO:

- calories should be viewed as the determining factor for weight gain/loss/maintenance
- macros should be viewed as the determining factor for body composition, athletic performance, and satiety/personal preference.

This nails it ^

Also, it should not be macros vs. CICO. It should be macros + CICO. Or the other way around CICO + macros for a good overall approach.