How much dietary fat in grams (not %) is needed

MoiAussi93
MoiAussi93 Posts: 1,948 Member
edited November 11 in Food and Nutrition
I don't like the focus on percentages with macros. If your body needs a certain amount of protein, that number shouldn't really change dramatically because you increase or decrease calories. It may change depending what your goals are, but that is a different issue.

I have found many articles and studies on how much protein we need per pound of body weight, or per pound of lean body weight. There are different opinions on this, but they are all easy to quantify and you can read and decide for yourself and make your goals accordingly.

However when it comes to fat I have not found anything that gives this in grams. Obviously the body does NEED fat. It is not something evil to be avoided. If you aren't eating enough, there are negative effects on the body. But I am trying to figure how much I need based on weight.

Has anyone read anything on this that you could point me to? Again, I am not looking for percentages...I have read plenty on the various competing recommendations for fat as a percentage of overall calories. That does not give me what I am looking for.

Thanks

Replies

  • diannethegeek
    diannethegeek Posts: 14,776 Member
    The guideline I've always seen is .3-.4 grams per pound of body weight.
  • diannethegeek
    diannethegeek Posts: 14,776 Member
    ^I would edit my reply above to add that that's a minimum, but I can't click the little gear on my phone with my big fingers.
  • MoiAussi93
    MoiAussi93 Posts: 1,948 Member
    diannethegeek wrote: »
    The guideline I've always seen is .3-.4 grams per pound of body weight.
    Thanks, that's the type of thing I'm looking for! I've had more fat than usual this week, but based on that over the longer term I may not be eating enough on a regular basis.

  • Sherriediva1
    Sherriediva1 Posts: 345 Member
    I'm feeling you on this. I have mine set to 33 and am having trouble staying under unless I have a 450-600 calorie burn. So my ? is do I have mine set too low or am I crazy? My diary is open and I would also appreciate any information about this. :\
  • Sherriediva1
    Sherriediva1 Posts: 345 Member
    Sherriediva1 wrote: »
    I'm feeling you on this. I have mine set to 33 and am having trouble staying under unless I have a 450-600 calorie burn. So my ? is do I have mine set too low or am I crazy? My diary is open and I would also appreciate any information about this. :\

    You guys are fast, there were no replies when I was typing! I'm at 208 and 33 seems really low by that calculation! THANKS
  • MoiAussi93
    MoiAussi93 Posts: 1,948 Member
    Sherriediva1 wrote: »
    I'm feeling you on this. I have mine set to 33 and am having trouble staying under unless I have a 450-600 calorie burn. So my ? is do I have mine set too low or am I crazy? My diary is open and I would also appreciate any information about this. :\
    I think we have the the same issue. If you're eating at maintenance or trying to gain, it is easy to get enough even if your set the percentage very low. But once you eliminate a few hundred calories, those percentages no longer make sense. You can eat what looks like a lot of fat based on percentage, but in reality it would be considered low fat on a grams basis. This is exactly what I am trying to get a better handle on.

  • kommodevaran
    kommodevaran Posts: 17,890 Member
    I aim for 70 grams per day. I don't know if it is necessary, but it makes me feel good. My weight is 126-127 lbs.
  • Nony_Mouse
    Nony_Mouse Posts: 5,646 Member
    OP - no idea sorry, but definitely interested in the answer!!

    Sherrie, that does seem low compared to mine (which I go over and do not care), even before I upped my calories a bit. I think at 1200 it was letting me have 40? Most of mine comes from things like avocado and olive oil, so again, yeah, not caring!! Go ahead and have a look at my diary, it will make you feel better :) I don't know that, health-wise, yours is *too* low though, just low enough that it's damn easy to go over. But honestly, if you're in a calorie deficit, going over a bit doesn't matter. Fat is not the devil!!

    Did you know, if rats don't get enough fat in their diet they tails fall off? We don't want that happening now do we? :p
  • littleknownblogger
    littleknownblogger Posts: 67 Member
    I agree with the premise of the OP, but I'm much more concerned with getting enough fat and protein, and staying under carbohydrates.
  • littleknownblogger
    littleknownblogger Posts: 67 Member
    To the OP: the reason that you don't see articles on how much 'fat' you need, is because there actually many different types. The easiest way is to get your minimum protein:

    healthcalculators.org/calculators/protein.asp

    Then, stay between 20-50 grams of carbohydrate. The rest of your calories should come from fat. Preferable saturated (but not TRANS-), and with higher omega-3 than omega-6 content (the higher, the better).

    Hope that helps!
  • Nony_Mouse
    Nony_Mouse Posts: 5,646 Member
    littleknownblogger wrote: »
    To the OP: the reason that you don't see articles on how much 'fat' you need, is because there actually many different types. The easiest way is to get your minimum protein:

    healthcalculators.org/calculators/protein.asp

    Then, stay between 20-50 grams of carbohydrate. The rest of your calories should come from fat. Preferable saturated (but not TRANS-), and with higher omega-3 than omega-6 content (the higher, the better).

    Hope that helps!

    Well, if you're doing 'paleo' (don't get me started on that term!!).
  • MoiAussi93
    MoiAussi93 Posts: 1,948 Member
    littleknownblogger wrote: »
    To the OP: the reason that you don't see articles on how much 'fat' you need, is because there actually many different types. The easiest way is to get your minimum protein:

    healthcalculators.org/calculators/protein.asp

    Then, stay between 20-50 grams of carbohydrate. The rest of your calories should come from fat. Preferable saturated (but not TRANS-), and with higher omega-3 than omega-6 content (the higher, the better).

    Hope that helps!
    I agree with your basic viewpoint. I know too many carbs don't work well for me...cutting them is a major priority. Reducing sugar and wheat helped a lot and I lost weight and felt better. Over the past several months I've made it more of a focus and have typically been at the 100-150 level...and I felt and looked even better. Now I am working on getting below 100 consistently.

    I would like to try under 50 at some point to see how my body reacts, but I need to gradually make some changes to the diet first...If I tried it today I don't think I could maintain it because it would be too major a change all at once. Incremental seems to work better with me in terms of helping new habits stick...except for added sugar and bread...those I had to cut almost completely because just reducing didn't work because of the ridiculous cravings just a little induced!


This discussion has been closed.

Categories