Ugh... I am eating too much protien
Replies
-
tmoneyag99 wrote: »tmoneyag99 wrote: »
Just like Kevin Hall's study comparing high carb and ketogenic diets disproving any sort of significant advantage that the KD supposedly has on fat loss when calories and protein were matched. Much of the cognitive dissonance ran rampant and still does to today.
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/early/2016/07/05/ajcn.116.133561.abstract
Again, just because it doesn't align with your bias doesn't make it any less true.
I'm so confused. So which way do you go to limit LBM loss and maximize fat loss?
The main point is that a ketogenic diet is not magic nor does it hold any advantage over any other diet for fat loss.
For insulin resistance and metabolic syndrome, it might be advantageous in that regard, but for normal metabolisms, any diet that produces a calorie deficit results in fat loss. Full stop.
To fight against LBM loss in any calorie deficit diet, 2 things must take priority: 1) adequate protein and 2) resistance/strength training. If you are lacking in either of those, lbm loss will occur much faster.
So is it reasonable for some of us to say Keto/Low Carb works because we aren't as hungry.
I'm pretty sure I never thought that I was going to magically lose weight without a caloric deficit. BUT being a busy working mother I also need a diet that has more upside than down.
So for me:
Keto/High Protien/Low carb:
- Allows me to operate at a deficit without being a zombie.
- Helps me feel like I'm more "awake"
- Helps me protect LBM (so I thought.)
I'm recovering from an injury so basically I'm just eating up all the muscle I built for 7 years pre-baby. YIPPEE!
Yes, it's absolutely reasonable to attribute the success of the diet to spontaneous reduced hunger. It results in a net calorie deficit, after all. Adherence to any diet is going to be the biggest success story in anyone's lives. The arguments across the interwebs are that everyone feels that their particular brand of dieting has been "the one" that clicked for them, and unfortunately tend to jump head first into recommending it for everyone when it might not be optimal for everyone.
Regarding the protection of lbm, again it's all contextual. It doesn't mean you're going to waste away, but this thread specifically initially began with the fear of eating "too much" (whatever that means) protein. The thing is, no one can ever define what "too much" protein means. There's no hard number that defines it. On the other hand, not getting enough protein results in cachexia, sarcopenia, osteopenia/osteoporosis, organ dysfunction, repair, etc. Which is why it's probably better to err on the higher end of protein intake, than less.
*If you have impaired kidney function, then that is going to be different.. protein must be limited, but not to be misinterpreted as completely avoided*
Aim to get around 0.8-1.2g of protein/lb/lbm or around 1g/lb of reference/ideal body weight. If you're recovering from an injury, be prudent and err on the higher end of protein. Activity is at your discretion and with the advice of your PT/medical team build up to what is tolerable. Being in a deficit is going to prolong the healing process depending on the severity of your calorie cut, so just keep that in mind. At the very least you could be on maintenance calories to sustain your injury, and just adjust fat intake up or down to control the deficit or surplus.3 -
I'm so confused now
I thought keto meant 70 to 80% of your calories from fat. If I'm eating > 70g of protein my fat calories hit around 55 to 60 percent of the diet.1 -
What is your calorie goal? It must be extremely low for that to be the case. Also, burned body fat counts as fat for percentages. The weight you are losing counts.
0 -
tmoneyag99 wrote: »I'm so confused now
I thought keto meant 70 to 80% of your calories from fat. If I'm eating > 70g of protein my fat calories hit around 55 to 60 percent of the diet.
Your body fat completes the total 70-80%. Dietary fat doesn’t make up the whole 70-80%.
Also, you shouldn’t be eating only 70g protein.
Let’s say your TDEE (calories to maintain weight) is 1800 and your ideal weight is 150 pounds. So you could (going with the simplest suggestion from anubis above) aim for 150g protein... that’s 600 calories. Plus let’s just say 40g carbs... 160 calories. So that’s 760 of your 1800. To maintain weight, you would figure 1040 calories from fat, but you want to lose weight so subtract your daily deficit. Say minus 300 calories. So your daily fat maximum would be 740 calories or about 82g.
3 -
tmoneyag99 wrote: »I'm so confused now
I thought keto meant 70 to 80% of your calories from fat. If I'm eating > 70g of protein my fat calories hit around 55 to 60 percent of the diet.
Keto is usually 70-75% fat at maintenance. Whatever your goal protein intake is, say 100g, it should stay about there whether you are losing or not.
For example, 100g of protein is 400kcal. If you are eating 1200kcal a day to lose, that is 30% protein. If you have lost all the weight you need and you are eating 2000 kcal a day, your protein goal is still 100g, or 400 kcal, but now that is only 20% protein. KWIM?
Very few keto'ers have their fat set at 80%. At that point you have to get into low protein (not good) or go zero carb, which is just not that common.2 -
tmoneyag99 wrote: »That 150 grams is for every single person switching to a ketogenic diet (man or woman) regardless of starting body weight. It is a minimum, men and very active athletes might possibly need even more.
Edit: After the first few weeks, protein numbers are usually adjusted to fit individual needs. But, protein intake helps cover your body's glucose needs when the metabolic processes that produce ketones are not running at full steam (like the first few weeks).
Well nuts. I've been doing this for about a month. Based on what you're saying I'be probably lost LBM. I havent tested Ketones because I keep reading it's worthless.
BUT I haven't touched sugar bread, starchy veggies, or fruit since the day after Christmas. My cheat "moments" was a couple glasses of red wine and a vodka water with a slice of lime. No sauces with sugar or anything like that.
Veggies = spinach, onions, bell peppers, broccoli, avocados, guac, kale,
Biggest mistake was to eat the Egg Bites from Starbucks (they use rice starch)
So at this point how much protein would you suggest I eat?
You're doing well!
Like you, I did not really get that protein should be a little higher at first when beginning keto. I am not a lean protein eater do I struggled to get it to even 90g... TBH, I still have to work at it, and I am at maintenance (mostly) now. I may have lost more muscle mass than I needed to, but happily, keto is thought to be muscle sparing so in the long run I doubt I was much different than those with slightly higher protein. Hopefully. Lol
That's actually a misconception many people have. "Muscle sparing" is in the context of starvation ketogenesis, and it really means that the rate of muscle breakdown is reduced .. not stopped. In other words, you are still wasting muscle tissue, just not as fast. That is the reason for ketone production in the first place, to displace all other substrates as the primary fuel source in the absence of energy intake. Ketosis is a survival mechanism and a constant state of ketosis should not be misrepresented as an optimal state to be in at all times.
From this article (links to studies included within): http://caloriesproper.com/protein-ketosis-and-lean-mass/
When not fat adapted, keto is not muscle sparing. Those first few weeks will go through more protein than usual and if one is not eating enough protein, your muscles will be the source of needed glucose.
Once fat adapted, your glucose needs fall, by as much as 2/3, increased BOHB appears to reduce nitrogen excretion and is associated with better maintenance and circulation of BCAAs (mainly leucine as I understand it, which helps maintain LBM despite lower insulin levels).
The article you linked to shows what would happen during the keto adaptation stage. To really compare properly, they would have needed to use people who are already fat adapted. KWIM?
But yes, muscle sparing would mean you are not losing muscle as fast while not eating enough (calories or protein). Muscle loss will occur in any diet if you are not eating enough calories or protein though... or doing resistance exercise. That's why a ketogenic diet is usually at least moderate protein, and why one does not have to worry about eating "too much protein". The only time too much protein is a problem is if there is not enough fat to use as energy - not a problem for those of us trying to lose weight.
If you want to keep all muscle, or gain some, resistance training of some sort and adequate protein is needed.... A caloric excess too.2 -
What is your calorie goal? It must be extremely low for that to be the case. Also, burned body fat counts as fat for percentages. The weight you are losing counts.
My calorie goal is about 1400kCal. Although I routinely go over that closer to 1500. According to MFP and my fitness watch I burn (without exercise) about 1800kCal per day. I am 5'3" 201.4lbs. When you take into my body comp... I'm pretty sure this is not unreasonable.
Side note: 4 years ago (pre baby) I lifted weights pretty rigorously and I wore the bodybug. On a sedentary day, I burned about 10kcal per pound of bodywheight then. When you consider that I've probably lost muscle and gained fat, the reduced calorie burn of 9kCal per pound of weight per day makes sense to me.1 -
your protein at 25 to 30% is fine. If you want to drop those 80 lbs faster and still energize, cut the carbs from 10 to 5% and raise the fat from 65 to 70%. your macros don't seem out of whack, but I'm assuming your caloric intake is higher then you need if you are not losing. Google a TDEE calculator and get those calories in check!0
-
My oh my. @tmoneyag, ketosis is not the CAUSE of weight loss. Why are you wanting your body in the state of ketosis? Is it for a medical reason? If for weight loss, think about this:
MANY people eat a ketogenic diet for their life time for a medical reason, epilepsy being the most common example. If ketosis CAUSED weight loss, these people who remain in ketosis 24/7/365 would never be able to stop their weight loss or their fat loss. Think about that. If ketosis were the CAUSE of weight loss/ fat loss, people who remain in a ketogenic state would have wasted away and died. Why does this not happen? Because they base their ketogenic intake on maintenance calories. Because they are eating at maintenance calories, they maintain their weight. Because they sort their macros to induce a state of ketosis, they are also in ketosis. The state of being in ketosis is NOT the cause of weight loss. Calories are the reason for weight loss/maintenance/gain.
That said, ketosis may well have a hunger suppression quality about it. It does for me (and many others). If you want to be in ketosis for hunger suppression try what others are suggesting above for overall health, weight loss, etc. From your 1400 daily calories, and your desire for 150 grams of protein (which I personally think is crazy high but that's neither here nor there and I do realize it was used as an example). 150 grams of protein is 600 calories or 40% of your calories. Set you macros then, at 40% protein. Set your carbohydrate intake to represent 50 grams of carbohydrates (the max generally suggested for ketosis). This would be about 15%. (50 carb grams x 4 = 200 calories. 200 calories/1400 = 14.2%. Fill the remainder to = 100% with fat which would be 45% fat or 630 calories.
Try that for a month and see how you do. Your "feed" would look something like this:
1400 calories- 15% carbs, 40% protein, 45% fat.
1400 calories- 210 calories in carbs, 560 calories in protein, 630 calories in fats
1400 calories- 50 grams of carbs, 140 grams of protein, 70 grams of fat.
If you have the paid version of MFP, you can set your percentages/grams precisely. If not you have to accept the 5% increments and follow/not follow accordingly. The difference between 140 and 150 grams of protein is in the rounding and diff between using grams and percentages.
Do I think this (above) will be your magic for weight loss/fat loss/satiation/overall health. A resounding NO. What you currently have your macros set to is absolutely fine IMO. Keep carbs low, know that both protein and fats are ESSENTIAL to health so get sufficient amounts and know a calorie deficit is needed for weight loss. If you are not losing weight, unless you have some intervening health issue, you are eating too many calories. Macros for health. Calories for weight loss.
0 -
Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »tmoneyag99 wrote: »I'm so confused now
I thought keto meant 70 to 80% of your calories from fat. If I'm eating > 70g of protein my fat calories hit around 55 to 60 percent of the diet.
Your body fat completes the total 70-80%. Dietary fat doesn’t make up the whole 70-80%.
Also, you shouldn’t be eating only 70g protein.
Let’s say your TDEE (calories to maintain weight) is 1800 and your ideal weight is 150 pounds. So you could (going with the simplest suggestion from anubis above) aim for 150g protein... that’s 600 calories. Plus let’s just say 40g carbs... 160 calories. So that’s 760 of your 1800. To maintain weight, you would figure 1040 calories from fat, but you want to lose weight so subtract your daily deficit. Say minus 300 calories. So your daily fat maximum would be 740 calories or about 82g.
Needs repeating.0 -
your protein at 25 to 30% is fine. If you want to drop those 80 lbs faster and still energize, cut the carbs from 10 to 5% and raise the fat from 65 to 70%. your macros don't seem out of whack, but I'm assuming your caloric intake is higher then you need if you are not losing. Google a TDEE calculator and get those calories in check!
Changing the macros by reducing carbs by 5% and increasing fat by 5% would still be the same calorie level and would most likely not change how fast someone loses. There are a few, mainly those with insulin resistance who may lose a bit faster the lower their carbs are with the same calorie level, but it is not a given. KWIM?
I lose faster when carbs are quite low but it is not a big difference. I am in the minority when it comes to that though.1 -
tmoneyag99 wrote: »That 150 grams is for every single person switching to a ketogenic diet (man or woman) regardless of starting body weight. It is a minimum, men and very active athletes might possibly need even more.
Edit: After the first few weeks, protein numbers are usually adjusted to fit individual needs. But, protein intake helps cover your body's glucose needs when the metabolic processes that produce ketones are not running at full steam (like the first few weeks).
Well nuts. I've been doing this for about a month. Based on what you're saying I'be probably lost LBM. I havent tested Ketones because I keep reading it's worthless.
BUT I haven't touched sugar bread, starchy veggies, or fruit since the day after Christmas. My cheat "moments" was a couple glasses of red wine and a vodka water with a slice of lime. No sauces with sugar or anything like that.
Veggies = spinach, onions, bell peppers, broccoli, avocados, guac, kale,
Biggest mistake was to eat the Egg Bites from Starbucks (they use rice starch)
So at this point how much protein would you suggest I eat?
You're doing well!
Like you, I did not really get that protein should be a little higher at first when beginning keto. I am not a lean protein eater do I struggled to get it to even 90g... TBH, I still have to work at it, and I am at maintenance (mostly) now. I may have lost more muscle mass than I needed to, but happily, keto is thought to be muscle sparing so in the long run I doubt I was much different than those with slightly higher protein. Hopefully. Lol
That's actually a misconception many people have. "Muscle sparing" is in the context of starvation ketogenesis, and it really means that the rate of muscle breakdown is reduced .. not stopped. In other words, you are still wasting muscle tissue, just not as fast. That is the reason for ketone production in the first place, to displace all other substrates as the primary fuel source in the absence of energy intake. Ketosis is a survival mechanism and a constant state of ketosis should not be misrepresented as an optimal state to be in at all times.
From this article (links to studies included within): http://caloriesproper.com/protein-ketosis-and-lean-mass/
When not fat adapted, keto is not muscle sparing. Those first few weeks will go through more protein than usual and if one is not eating enough protein, your muscles will be the source of needed glucose.
Once fat adapted, your glucose needs fall, by as much as 2/3, increased BOHB appears to reduce nitrogen excretion and is associated with better maintenance and circulation of BCAAs (mainly leucine as I understand it, which helps maintain LBM despite lower insulin levels).
The article you linked to shows what would happen during the keto adaptation stage. To really compare properly, they would have needed to use people who are already fat adapted. KWIM?
But yes, muscle sparing would mean you are not losing muscle as fast while not eating enough (calories or protein). Muscle loss will occur in any diet if you are not eating enough calories or protein though... or doing resistance exercise. That's why a ketogenic diet is usually at least moderate protein, and why one does not have to worry about eating "too much protein". The only time too much protein is a problem is if there is not enough fat to use as energy - not a problem for those of us trying to lose weight.
If you want to keep all muscle, or gain some, resistance training of some sort and adequate protein is needed.... A caloric excess too.
The bolded area is my main point. The misconception lies around the term "muscle sparing" as if it negates any lbm loss at all. Fung bastardized a study on starvation keto and falsely misinformed fasting practitioners that people actually gained muscle by eating nothing, and when pegged to cite his study, the rate of lbm loss dropped to 1/4 of its original rate by day 4 of fasting onward, yet did not acknowledge that a rate of loss was still occurring.
As far as muscle building is concerned, if you're familiar with ketogains or Lyle McDonald's book on the subject, there are reasons why TKD or CKD exist.
http://caloriesproper.com/muscle-growth-sans-carbs/
And to your credit regarding keto adapted studies, I will link these:
http://caloriesproper.com/protein-requirements-carbs-and-nutrient-partitioning/
Image was taken from this link:
http://sci-fit.net/2017/ketogenic-diet-fat-muscle-performance/
2 -
blog.myfitnesspal.com/ketogenic-diet-safe-weight-loss/
This protein confusion will be around for a while based on the above MFP link that I just read for the first time today. I see others have commented in the past.0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »blog.myfitnesspal.com/ketogenic-diet-safe-weight-loss/
This protein confusion will be around for a while based on the above MFP link that I just read for the first time today. I see others have commented in the past.
The problem with this is that too many fad keto dieters are only going to rely on % of their macro counts. Even normal dieters rely solely on % instead hard numbers, like actual grams of protein, fat, and carbs. And the sum of those macro grams is what contributes to the total number of calories.0 -
From the blog:
Oh noes! I sure hopes it turns onto broccoli and not chocolate.Remember that a ketogenic diet is not a high-protein diet. Consuming too much protein may shift you out of a state of ketosis, as the body can convert excess protein into carbohydrates.
I always did about 60-63% fat... Never did I ever get 75%. Plus, percentages are BS.To achieve nutritional ketosis, adjust your MyFitnessPal macronutrient goals to achieve a daily intake of 70–75% fat, 15–20% protein and 5–10% calories from carbohydrates.
ok...However, in order to achieve ketosis, one must consider this a long-term lifestyle change and follow a very specific eating plan to maintain weight loss over time.GaleHawkins wrote: »blog.myfitnesspal.com/ketogenic-diet-safe-weight-loss/
This protein confusion will be around for a while based on the above MFP link that I just read for the first time today. I see others have commented in the past.
There's a lot more confusion about keto other than the protein issue.
This whole world is confused.GaleHawkins wrote: »blog.myfitnesspal.com/ketogenic-diet-safe-weight-loss/
This protein confusion will be around for a while based on the above MFP link that I just read for the first time today. I see others have commented in the past.
The problem with this is that too many fad keto dieters are only going to rely on % of their macro counts. Even normal dieters rely solely on % instead hard numbers, like actual grams of protein, fat, and carbs. And the sum of those macro grams is what contributes to the total number of calories.
Exactly. They don't understand that macro percentages are a sliding scale. Eat too little, get too little protein. Eat too much, your carbs are going to knock you out. That's why we always advise:
Carbs is a ceiling in grams.
Protein is a range in grams.
Fat fills the rest. The fat being the scalable variable here.
We have a FAQ and a page full of helpful threads in here. But some people don't want to research/read. And then they go listen to Facebook groups and YouTube vids from people spouting nonsense. Then, the blog chimes in. I can't even.
As a low-carber, I don't generally necessarily recommend protein as high as Anubis has recommended for everyone. I do agree though that going 10 -30g over on protein isn't going to bring the Apocalypse. You absolutely, IMO, MUST get .8g per kg of LBM as a minimum if sedentary. If you are active, get 1g per kg LBM minimum. If you are super active, 1.2g per kg of LBM. Some keto calcs will do a range for you. I always always get the middle range of what's given as my minimum. I workout 5 days a week, strength training and cardio split. I know I could eat more protein and probably should. I have a hard time with that. So, I'm a hair under 5'10', female, 39, active, and hovering around 161-165lb (to my dismay but my clothes still fit so whutchagonnado?) I get a minimum of 100g of protein every day. Sometimes, like when I get lucky enough to have a ribeye, I blow it out of the water. I'm no longer keto, but I ate like this when I was. 100g is the middle of my range, so hardA$$ me aims and hits the middle or above.
So...here's what I'm saying. I can't tell you what to do. Many of us here are advising, and even reddit keto is going to tell you, macros (at least carbs and protein) are going to be rigid lines in the sand for the most part, IN GRAMS. I will tell you, your health will suffer if you don't get enough protein. You will have to overeat protein by a hella-lot to kick yourself out of ketosis. And if you are doing this to lose weight or as a T2, temp slipping out is not the end of the world, especially over protein. The glucose/insulin response regarding protein isn't like Skittles. It's a slow change. Besides, your body is always turning protein into glucose at a fixed rate all the time as needed. No evidence that we can nudge the rate up by savaging a lb of meat.
Your body MUST have enough to sustain itself and to repair. All diets cannibalize your LBM. You want to counteract that as best you can.
(Disclaimer...if CKD is in play, stop reading, forget all this, and listen to your dr.
)
4 -
It's true I do advocate for a bit higher protein than most might be comfortable with (excluding anyone with kidney dysfunction), but primarily it's because there are some keto groups that actually will dissuade people to eat more than 40g of protein and proclaim (and I mean proclaim in the biblical sense) that it is actually borderline "high protein" and to consume more fat until satiety.
The absolute elite of zealotry was to use macro % as a measurement of grams to total 100% and to deny the concept of energy/calorie balance, meaning if one were to adhere to 5/15/80:c/p/f, then having 5g of carbs meant that they should have 15g of protein, and 80g of fat. To double each of those would mean 10g carbs/30g pro/160g fat ... and so on.
Every gram of fat is ~9kcal.. that exponentially increases radically. Someone actually also thought that 5g (by weight) of spinach was going to spike their insulin and kick them out of ketosis.
I've spent the last 2 years diving deeper than necessary into biochemistry (and I still am) while arduously arguing against the fear of protein as an unsubstantiated claim that it kicks anyone out of ketosis or that it was detrimental to fat loss. If anyone is familiar with Dr. Ted Naiman, he's evolved his views along with the science as studies have illustrated that a higher protein consumption actually doesn't disrupt ketosis, and in terms of fat loss as the sole reason for being low carb/keto, ketosis is just a byproduct of burning stored body fat - not the goal. He's distanced himself away from dogmatic views of what a "true" ketogenic diet is, and is rather more focused on improving the overall health and well-being of his patients than measuring their ketone levels (which he doesn't).
Studies also have shown the satiety index of food, where almost all other foods were found to be more satiating than fat, and some carbs were more satiating than protein. In terms of diet adherence and remaining in a calorie deficit, satiety contributes greatly to that goal. No one wants to eat very little and be ravenous or hangry.
For full disclosure, I am primarily low carb and have been for the past 8 years, being ketogenic for the last 2 years, but I am also macro agnostic in terms of actual practice. I am insulin sensitive enough to handle ~150g of carbs and active enough to still remain ketotic if tested. I just follow the inverse relationship of carbs and fat, so if I were to have a higher carb day, I reduce fat consumption, and vice versa.
I'm like everyone else and where I have questions, I seek out those answers from all sides, not just ones that align with my bias. I will actually look for views that discredit my bias because the last thing I want is to be misinformed.
So to finally address the heuristic of protein intake, optimal is going to be different for each person, but too little is going to be more problematic than more. Protein needs are going to be different depending on age, activity level, body weight, etc. The demographic whose needs actually increase with more protein are adolescents/teens, experienced and trained performance or physique athletes/gym goers, and the elderly. The casually active, young - middle adult may not need as much protein, but that's also the age range where people tend to be susceptible to developing metabolic and weight related problems, so that's also variable.7 -
@anubis609
This is exactly the discussion of protein I was hoping for.
Thank you. Your knowledge and POV is much appreciated. People are always locking themselves in boxes. I was hoping to get people to stop being afraid of protein. More protein won't hurt you. Too little is definitely concerning. The more muscle mass we have going into our middle to older years, the better off we are going to be for overall health, mobility, and longevity. You need to take the long view.
A few grams of extra protein is not going to ruin your weight loss journey.
But at least those that read this are educated so that have the information to make good decisions.
4 -
baconslave wrote: »@anubis609
This is exactly the discussion of protein I was hoping for.
Thank you. Your knowledge and POV is much appreciated. People are always locking themselves in boxes. I was hoping to get people to stop being afraid of protein. More protein won't hurt you. Too little is definitely concerning. The more muscle mass we have going into our middle to older years, the better off we are going to be for overall health, mobility, and longevity. You need to take the long view.
A few grams of extra protein is not going to ruin your weight loss journey.
But at least those that read this are educated so that have the information to make good decisions.
Anytime! I enjoy progressive discussion.
2 -
Just saw this today on twitter: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0031938412002806
This has some problems, when used as proof that higher protein is better on a keto diet. Everyone was obese (not just overweight). The calories were originally set very low (33% of maintenance). The high protein was 1.1g (+/- 0.2g) per kg body weight. Which isn't really "high" in my eyes. It's like 110 grams a day for the weights of the subjects. And normal was down in the 75 grams range.
Still, it's fair enough support that eating slightly above 100 grams of protein a day, while on a low carb diet, is going to leave you better off than eating lower amounts.4 -
So in conclusion a diet within your calorie limit with a Macro percentage profile such as below is best?
45% - 57% Fat
10% Carbs
33% - 40% Protein
For people that need the math done a 1200 kCal Diet that would be
60g fat (minimum)
30g Carb Max
100 mg Protein minimum.
My understanding is that percentages are used because everyone's caloric needs are different so you start with Percentages to get to the macros needed. Apparently for this WOE 100g of protein are the floor with little to no ceiling. People with Higher caloric requirements can eat at a lower protein percentage and higher fat percentage as long as the protien floor is met. Based on this thread the ceiling for protien is 200g. Is this true for Everyone or just Men and large women. Keep in mind smaller women or women such as my self that are meant to be small (I'm 5'3" I shouldn't exceed 140lbs at 20% fat) have a lower TDEE due to lower overall body mass. For those of you that quote Lyle McDonald even he maintains smaller women have tighter constraints on their calories and macro requirements.2 -
Gender, age, height, body weight, bf%, metabolic health, activity level and experience, goals, etc. are all part of the multivariate factors that determine someone's energy needs. Leaner individuals are at a greater risk of lbm loss for the fact that they have less substrate stores to make up the difference in a deficit, assuming a deficit is a goal. Part of what makes basing protein needs on lbm and bodyweight is that it tracks along with controllable factors (body weight, activity level, and energy balance), so it's not going to be a blanket number for everyone.
Even in quoting Lyle, I keep this in mind since it's impossible to say what should be appropriate, except that protein should be a priority macro based on calculations or even rough estimations. Whatever the person decides to fill the rest of their macro calories with is completely up to the individual and their preference.2 -
I don't think 200 grams is a ceiling for anyone (man, woman, or child). But, it is going to be practically impossible for you to get over 200 grams a day, eating whole foods, within your calorie goals (or even when eating just to hunger). It is safe to say that up to 200 grams won't kick you out, because that is where most of us have ready experience to make statements. Very few people consistently consume more than 200 grams a day, outside the body-building community. If I eat a kilogram of ribeye a day (which is pretty normal when I am weight stable), I hit 240 grams, but I am also eating nearly 3,000 calories. A 2,000 calories/day eater would be getting like 160 grams a day. Eating lower than that, and you're going to have a hard time getting to 200 grams without explicitly supplementing protein.
Lyle McDonald is a CICO guy. He wrote the book on ketogenic diets, but he's still sees CICO as a basically fixed equation and not the reality it is. What we consume has an impact on how many calories we burn. A diet that is 5000 calories of steak is going to have very different results from one that is 5000 calories of bread.
Do smaller women need fewer calories? Yeah. Do they need only 1,200? Unlikely. Eating to hunger or a reasonable calorie goal, you will be able to stay at or above 100 grams of protein. But, you'll likely not go over 200 grams.2 -
Gender, age, height, body weight, bf%, metabolic health, activity level and experience, goals, etc. are all part of the multivariate factors that determine someone's energy needs. Leaner individuals are at a greater risk of lbm loss for the fact that they have less substrate stores to make up the difference in a deficit, assuming a deficit is a goal. Part of what makes basing protein needs on lbm and bodyweight is that it tracks along with controllable factors (body weight, activity level, and energy balance), so it's not going to be a blanket number for everyone.
Even in quoting Lyle, I keep this in mind since it's impossible to say what should be appropriate, except that protein should be a priority macro based on calculations or even rough estimations. Whatever the person decides to fill the rest of their macro calories with is completely up to the individual and their preference.
This is all based on the context of this group and the keto WOE. Clearly a high carber would eat more carbs. This group is dedicated to the low carb WOE so my post is in that context.1
This discussion has been closed.