Question about exceeding fat grams...

jnv7594
jnv7594 Posts: 983 Member
edited November 2024 in Health and Weight Loss
I read somewhere in a post here a while back that one gram of fat equals about 9 calories. So here is my question. On occasion I go over my fat grams, not by much...just 2 or 3. However, since I usually have one or sometimes two hundred calories left over at the end of the day, I don't worry too much about it. But what is the best way to figure these extra fat grams in? If I go over by, say two grams of fat, do I just look at those as 19 calories added and just make sure there is enough leftover calories to cover them? So say I've hit 1600 calories for the day, and my calorie limit is 1780. Then say that I also went over my fat grams by two. Do I then add those 19 extra calories on top of the 1600 and consider that since I still have 180 calories left over I am okay for the day? Or is it best just to ignore the extra fat grams if they are minimal? I guess I'm asking because I've been wondering what if I hit my 1780 for the day, but then exceed my fat grams. That would obviously give me less of a calorie deficit, although minimal, am I right?

Or maybe I am thinking about this all completely wrong, which is possible, lol. I've been wondering this for a while though. Would appreciate any feedback.

Replies

  • jpaulie
    jpaulie Posts: 917 Member
    2 fat grams is not a big deal. The whole idea is to get close to your target intake. I am typically over on my fat but I also get my fat from very healthy sources like sockeye salmon)fresh/frozen, not canned) and avocado oil. Usually if I am over on my cals for a day it is the fat that nudges me there but I never worry about it because of the quality of the fat I am getting and the nutrients it contains
  • Liftng4Lis
    Liftng4Lis Posts: 15,149 Member
    You are way overthinking this. If you're under on calories, then I wouldn't worry about it.
  • jnv7594
    jnv7594 Posts: 983 Member
    Liftng4Lis wrote: »
    You are way overthinking this. If you're under on calories, then I wouldn't worry about it.

    I guess it's more of a question for the future. My calorie allotment is getting lower as I lose weight as is my fat gram allotment, and I know the closer I get to my goal it will be important to take any excess calories into account. Right now it's not making a difference, no. But in a couple months it might, so I'm just curious if others deal with the same and what they do to account for the extra fat...or if they just ignore it and only watch calories.

  • jpaulie
    jpaulie Posts: 917 Member
    what is your % of daily calories you set for fat? It could also be too low
  • jnv7594
    jnv7594 Posts: 983 Member
    jpaulie wrote: »
    what is your % of daily calories you set for fat? It could also be too low

    I just use the default percentages that MFP sets. I have a 1780 calorie allowance right now, and my grams of fat are 59.
  • Christine_72
    Christine_72 Posts: 16,049 Member
    I ignore it and just watch the calories. Good question though, I've never thought about it like that
  • Liftng4Lis
    Liftng4Lis Posts: 15,149 Member
    jnv7594 wrote: »
    Liftng4Lis wrote: »
    You are way overthinking this. If you're under on calories, then I wouldn't worry about it.

    I guess it's more of a question for the future. My calorie allotment is getting lower as I lose weight as is my fat gram allotment, and I know the closer I get to my goal it will be important to take any excess calories into account. Right now it's not making a difference, no. But in a couple months it might, so I'm just curious if others deal with the same and what they do to account for the extra fat...or if they just ignore it and only watch calories.
    Honestly, I look at my macros as minimums, so I don't worry about it so long as I'm under on calories.
  • lynn_glenmont
    lynn_glenmont Posts: 10,165 Member
    edited January 2015
    So say I've hit 1600 calories for the day, and my calorie limit is 1780. Then say that I also went over my fat grams by two. Do I then add those 19 extra calories on top of the 1600 and consider that since I still have 180 calories left over I am okay for the day? Or is it best just to ignore the extra fat grams if they are minimal? I guess I'm asking because I've been wondering what if I hit my 1780 for the day, but then exceed my fat grams. That would obviously give me less of a calorie deficit, although minimal, am I right?

    The calorie tracking on MFP takes into account the calories attributable to fat. In your example, you would be double counting the calories from fat if you "add those 19 extra calories on top of the 1600." And no, exceeding your fat gram quota on a day when you hit your calorie goal does not give you "less of a calorie deficit." It's already accounted for.
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    edited January 2015
    christinev297 wrote: »
    I ignore it and just watch the calories. Good question though, I've never thought about it like that
    Liftng4Lis wrote: »
    Honestly, I look at my macros as minimums, so I don't worry about it so long as I'm under on calories.

    Yes, and yes.
  • jnv7594
    jnv7594 Posts: 983 Member
    lynn_glenmont, thank you for letting me know that MFP already takes those calories from extra fat into account. I didn't know that.
  • jnv7594
    jnv7594 Posts: 983 Member
    Thanks, for the advice everyone. I will just focus on my calories. You all were a great help.
  • bulbadoof
    bulbadoof Posts: 1,058 Member
    i don't understand your question. are you asking if you should count fat calories twice?

    calories have to come from somewhere. if something has, for example, 31 calories, 3g fat and 1g carbs, then 27 of those calories are fat calories and 4 of them are carbs. it's still only 31 calories; you don't have to add another 27.

    so if you have 1600 calories logged and you're over on fat, that doesn't mean you have to add the fat calories again, they're already counted. you just had more fat today than usual, and you'll likely be under on carbs or protein instead.
  • lynn_glenmont
    lynn_glenmont Posts: 10,165 Member
    jnv7594 wrote: »
    lynn_glenmont, thank you for letting me know that MFP already takes those calories from extra fat into account. I didn't know that.

    You're welcome. It occurs to me I might have oversimplified a little - MFP takes those fat calories into account so long as you're using "good" database entries -- preferably the ones without asterisks that are drawn from the USDA database (for whole foods/commodity foods) or ones that accurately reflect the manufacturers' nutrition labels (if you don't have the label to compare, look for entries that have lots of user confirmations). If you're using a lot of "bad" entries (where the person who wrote them apparently just made stuff up), there's no way of knowing what's going on.
  • jnv7594
    jnv7594 Posts: 983 Member
    lynn_glenmont wrote: »
    jnv7594 wrote: »
    lynn_glenmont, thank you for letting me know that MFP already takes those calories from extra fat into account. I didn't know that.

    You're welcome. It occurs to me I might have oversimplified a little - MFP takes those fat calories into account so long as you're using "good" database entries -- preferably the ones without asterisks that are drawn from the USDA database (for whole foods/commodity foods) or ones that accurately reflect the manufacturers' nutrition labels (if you don't have the label to compare, look for entries that have lots of user confirmations). If you're using a lot of "bad" entries (where the person who wrote them apparently just made stuff up), there's no way of knowing what's going on.

    Right. I always double check that the entries are correct before I used them, and I either modify them if they're wrong or make my own new entry. It amazes me how many of the database entries are wrong.

  • jnv7594
    jnv7594 Posts: 983 Member
    bulbadoof wrote: »
    i don't understand your question. are you asking if you should count fat calories twice?

    calories have to come from somewhere. if something has, for example, 31 calories, 3g fat and 1g carbs, then 27 of those calories are fat calories and 4 of them are carbs. it's still only 31 calories; you don't have to add another 27.

    so if you have 1600 calories logged and you're over on fat, that doesn't mean you have to add the fat calories again, they're already counted. you just had more fat today than usual, and you'll likely be under on carbs or protein instead.

    I think I was just over-complicating it like I sometimes do. :) Thanks for the response.

This discussion has been closed.

Categories