What is so bad about Default / USDA macros?

For me, the fiber is set too low and the sodium too high, but that's me. I don't tell (or expect) someone else to change their settings to suit me. I set the fiber at 25 for the base number (MFP increases it automatically when I have exercise calories) and it is a minimum for me. Sodium I set at 2000, but I aim for 1500-1800 max. I find that if I'm eating enough actual freal food (vs a lot of processed stuff) the sodium tends to take care of itself.

I feel the same way as you do. I heard so much about how high protein and fat diets (and low carb) are the most healthy. I've always eaten a lot of carbs and never had a weight problem, but that doesn't necessarily mean healthy, so I figured I'd try upping the fat and protein and lowering my carbs (keeping them to mostly only fruit and veggie sources). I was constantly constipated, bloaty, fatigued, and (understandably) grumpy for the duration of my ratio switch.

On the other hand, I feel great at the USDA recommended ratios, so that's what I try to hit when I'm tracking my macros. I don't care if the current trend is away from that, because it works for me.

Insulin drives fat. Carbs drive insulin. How well your body uptakes insulin will determine how many carbs your body can process before you either have to a)burn the excess or b) store the excess glucose as fat. That's why some people (like me) have to eat low carb, and others can get away with more. Low carb is not a fad for a lot of people, for some of us with metabolic syndrome, diabetes, insulin resistance, etc, it is a prescription. If you can handle carbs, good for you!

ETA: agreed that the given protein amount is very low. I eat 1 gram per pound of lean mass.

If you're eating at a deficit, insulin spikes and fat storage are not an issue because your body will burn those fat stores later in the day anyway...

That didn't happen to me. I stored everything I ate as fat. I ate at a deficit, netted 1200, then 1400, then did TDEE <20%, lifted heavy, ate a balanced USDA diet and only lost 4#'s from January to April.

Went to the doctor for a pain in my tummy...had bloodwork done that came back with a casual BG of 266. :noway: Other than the lack of weight loss and the ability to gain no matter what I ate, there was no way for me to know. In retrospect, the clues were there, but whatever. I was mystified because I gave up soda 3 or 4 years prior & all fast food 5 yrs prior.

My point is, as long as I'm able to keep my BG below 140mg/dl, weight comes off. I stall as soon as it gets above 140mg/dl.

Sorry, I was referring to people without diabetes or other metabolic disorders. Obviously if you're diabetic, or have trouble controlling blood glucose levels, then weight loss and body composition is not so simple. On another note, if you're lifting heavy and eating a "balanced USDA diet", then you are not going to have enough amino acid availability in your blood stream due to lack of protein, especially if you are cutting. If your goal is muscle building, or muscle preservation during a cut, then you should be consuming at least .82g of protein per lb of body weight. This is not a made up number, it was found through scientific studies. I'm don't know much about metabolic syndromes, but I've read a lot of scientific studies on bodybuilding nutrition, and you're going to be spinning your wheels if you're lifting weights and only eating 50g of protein a day. You may get results, but not as optimal results as you could be getting.

I appreciate your response If I seem a little disillusioned with the USDA food pyramid, it's because I'd been doing all the right things for the last 15 yrs and following USDA recommendations while slowly losing beta function and now I'm fighting like hell to get to a new normal.

My goal is indeed muscle building, as it had been during those years. You can't imagine what it's like to be sitting on that ridiculous piece of noisy paper on that goofy table telling the doctor that I've been lifting weights 3x wkly for 10 yrs, no soda, no fast food, etc. I even offered to show them my MFP diary, all in an effort to get them to explain why, if I followed what was supposed to be a 'healthy balanced diet' I was 30#'s overweight and was clearly as demonstrated by my BG, diabetic. I also tried to tell them that I'm a dog walker for a living, so I migrate a few miles every day depending on the appointments I have....so wth? :huh: Not only did they not believe me, but they were less than interested, even annoyed with my confusion & apparent denial.

Couple that with MFP & TDEE <20%, eating more, eating less, getting a fitbit to correctly gauge my TDEE etc. I had all sorts of stats to argue that this was not possible as I did what 'people' said to do....move more, lift heavy, create a deficit. Pfft. Talk about frustration??!!

All of that being said, again, I appreciate your response about protein & the only caveat I have right now is personal and hopefully temporary....Upon dx (April 114, 2013) I presented with microalbuminuria, as my A1C was a whopping 9.9. I'm going for my 3 month bloods at the end of July so I'm hoping that will resolve itself at which point I can increase my protein intake.

Hope you don't mind....sending FR, have other questions

:drinker:

Insulin drives fat. Carbs drive insulin. How well your body uptakes insulin will determine how many carbs your body can process before you either have to a)burn the excess or b) store the excess glucose as fat. That's why some people (like me) have to eat low carb, and others can get away with more. Low carb is not a fad for a lot of people, for some of us with metabolic syndrome, diabetes, insulin resistance, etc, it is a prescription. If you can handle carbs, good for you!

ETA: agreed that the given protein amount is very low. I eat 1 gram per pound of lean mass.

Hmmmm why would you recommend eating more protein, when protein is highly insulinogenic? Insulin drives fat, right?

You know why... dat der regurgitation of information without fully understanding what is being said .

Insulin drives fat. Carbs drive insulin. How well your body uptakes insulin will determine how many carbs your body can process before you either have to a)burn the excess or b) store the excess glucose as fat. That's why some people (like me) have to eat low carb, and others can get away with more. Low carb is not a fad for a lot of people, for some of us with metabolic syndrome, diabetes, insulin resistance, etc, it is a prescription. If you can handle carbs, good for you!

ETA: agreed that the given protein amount is very low. I eat 1 gram per pound of lean mass.

Hmmmm why would you recommend eating more protein, when protein is highly insulinogenic? Insulin drives fat, right?

You know why... dat der regurgitation of information without fully understanding what is being said .

Mock me all you want, I don't care. I'm sure you also know that while protein is insulinogenic (whey protein being the most), they don't spike blood sugar, and it also triggers the release of glucagon to facilitate absorption of amino acids, which carb rich foods do not. My point is that adequate protein intake, seems to support my lean mass, and provides my body with a way to store glucose for future needs without having to give up a ketogenic state or cause an increase in blood sugar.

bump for later

They're useful if you are

a) eating a maintenance level diet and
b) are a healthy individual without any metabolic dysregulation

How many people would that be on MFP?

About 10 in total.....

I hear so many say the default macros (USDA) are bunk. They seem to work for me, but everyone seems to think they don't have the optimal ratio. Also if the USDA macros are bunk, can you list other countries who's health and agricultural services actually claim you need different ratios?

well it depends exactly what you are referring to. The USDA also has a "food plate" which is fairly good for a "normal" person or at least on the right track



the old way of grains...ie carbs being the center of your diet is what most people had an issue with that. WHy would a diet be centered around something you don't need to eat?






I don't like that quite as much. I never understand why dairy is a must. The plate doesn't look bad to me though.

At the end of the day the focus seemed to be on grains and dairy...why? That part always confused me. I didn't have that pissed off feeling many had it just didn't make sense to me.

Because dairy and grains are awesome! They are both pretty nutrient dense, super-yummy, and versatile, encompassing a wide range of food potentials.

The problem I have with the "plate" is that it includes no fat! Sure, some dairy or protein have fat, but not all - say you're eating chicken breast for your protein, and drinking 1% milk... then your diet includes pretty much zero fat. I think fat is a really important macro for a variety of reasons, so it bothers me that our government is still advocating for a low-fat diet. I thought the whole "low-fat" concept died out in the 1980s.

The problem I have with the "plate" is that it includes no fat! Sure, some dairy or protein have fat, but not all - say you're eating chicken breast for your protein, and drinking 1% milk... then your diet includes pretty much zero fat. I think fat is a really important macro for a variety of reasons, so it bothers me that our government is still advocating for a low-fat diet. I thought the whole "low-fat" concept died out in the 1980s.

This is the new Harvard rendition, I like that it includes healthy fats, but still think the recommended carb intake is a bit too high especially if you take into account the sedentary lifestyle most people lead. (haven't quite figured out how to put it in picture format