MACROS OR COUNTING CALORIES???
Options
ymarq84
Posts: 16 Member
Question to all MFP friends do you guys track your food based on calories or macros? Also have any of you purchased the upgraded version or thinking of upgrading?
-How do you figure out how many grams of each to eat? Any help is helpful, thank you!
-How do you figure out how many grams of each to eat? Any help is helpful, thank you!
0
Replies
-
Yes - I track for calories AND macros.
Without tracking calories....I won't lose weight. Tracking macros for me is about staying full, fueling existing lean muscle, and meeting nutritional needs for bodily functions.
It takes some time, tweaking meals and snacks to get me in my preferred macro ranges.0 -
I went with basing my protein and fat MINIMUMS on my weight (0.35-0.45g fat per lb goal body weight and 0.6-0.8g protein per pound goal body weight). Then, fill in with carbs as appropriate for your personal needs (energy levels, medical concerns, satiety preference, etc.).
ETA: And I don't pay for premium. I just messed around with my percentages until I got close to the gram levels I'd calculated.0 -
If you care about weight loss, it's all about the calories. The fitness people worry about macros.0
-
maillemaker wrote: »If you care about weight loss, it's all about the calories. The fitness people worry about macros.
I don't know that that is true. Many people have problems with satiety. In fact, I believe you have posted many times about it. One of the ways to improve satiety is to experiment with various macro levels to find a way of eating that provides enough volume of food and keeps you feeling full longer. It is not only for "fitness people".0 -
maillemaker wrote: »If you care about weight loss, it's all about the calories. The fitness people worry about macros.
I don't know that that is true. Many people have problems with satiety. In fact, I believe you have posted many times about it. One of the ways to improve satiety is to experiment with various macro levels to find a way of eating that provides enough volume of food and keeps you feeling full longer. It is not only for "fitness people".
I dunno. I'm not sure why you wouldn't want to be one of those "fitness people" anyway. They've got the muscle definition thing going for them, instead of that skinny fat physique.
Calories are more important for weight loss, that's true - start there.0 -
maillemaker wrote: »If you care about weight loss, it's all about the calories. The fitness people worry about macros.
I care about weight loss, and I don't exercise - I did a couple of months walking a half-hour a day, but stopped a month ago. I've lost 55 pounds so far, 34 since starting MFP in mid-April, and have 40 to go.
At first, it was all about the calories, but, as I have continued logging (190 days today), it has become equally important for me to hit my macros and micros. At 1200 calories, that is hard to do, and I have to plan and juggle things constantly, but I am able to make most of them every day, and not go over the ones I need to keep lower too, like sodium. The only one I have trouble going over is sugar, and that is mostly from included sugars, like in milk, and occasionally carbs. But I make sure to make or exceed my protein, fiber, calcium and vitamins every day.
0 -
LaceyBirds wrote: »maillemaker wrote: »If you care about weight loss, it's all about the calories. The fitness people worry about macros.
I care about weight loss, and I don't exercise - I did a couple of months walking a half-hour a day, but stopped a month ago. I've lost 55 pounds so far, 34 since starting MFP in mid-April, and have 40 to go.
At first, it was all about the calories, but, as I have continued logging (190 days today), it has become equally important for me to hit my macros and micros. At 1200 calories, that is hard to do, and I have to plan and juggle things constantly, but I am able to make most of them every day, and not go over the ones I need to keep lower too, like sodium. The only one I have trouble going over is sugar, and that is mostly from included sugars, like in milk, and occasionally carbs. But I make sure to make or exceed my protein, fiber, calcium and vitamins every day.
I actually stopped tracking sugar because the "limit" is based off of added sugars, but there is no distinction in the database for added vs. "natural" sugar. So, it's pretty irrelevant.0 -
Calories=weight loss, macros=nutrition. Play around to find a ratio that works for you. I'm fine with the standard 50/30/20 (though I might switch a bit of the carbs to protein). Others find their success by going low carb or low fat.0
-
maillemaker wrote: »If you care about weight loss, it's all about the calories. The fitness people worry about macros.
LOL...really?
Macros (and micro-nutrients) make up calories and help determine the type of weight loss, cell repair, health through nutritional balance and RDA , energy and satiety
I'm not sure that's a fitness proposition, it's a sustainable health proposition though0 -
LaceyBirds wrote: »maillemaker wrote: »If you care about weight loss, it's all about the calories. The fitness people worry about macros.
I care about weight loss, and I don't exercise - I did a couple of months walking a half-hour a day, but stopped a month ago. I've lost 55 pounds so far, 34 since starting MFP in mid-April, and have 40 to go.
At first, it was all about the calories, but, as I have continued logging (190 days today), it has become equally important for me to hit my macros and micros. At 1200 calories, that is hard to do, and I have to plan and juggle things constantly, but I am able to make most of them every day, and not go over the ones I need to keep lower too, like sodium. The only one I have trouble going over is sugar, and that is mostly from included sugars, like in milk, and occasionally carbs. But I make sure to make or exceed my protein, fiber, calcium and vitamins every day.
I swapped out sugar tracking for fibre - far more important and useful0 -
I actually stopped tracking sugar because the "limit" is based off of added sugars, but there is no distinction in the database for added vs. "natural" sugar. So, it's pretty irrelevant.I swapped out sugar tracking for fibre - far more important and useful
Yes, I forgot to mention that I'm pre-diabetic, so I have to limit my sugars and carbs. I'm also on cholesterol and blood pressure meds, so I'm limiting . . . aaaaaagggghhhh, basically all the good stuff.
0 -
Both. You ll have to decide if you want to be a sugar burner or a fat burner. Standard or low carb diet.0
-
LaceyBirds wrote: »I actually stopped tracking sugar because the "limit" is based off of added sugars, but there is no distinction in the database for added vs. "natural" sugar. So, it's pretty irrelevant.I swapped out sugar tracking for fibre - far more important and useful
Yes, I forgot to mention that I'm pre-diabetic, so I have to limit my sugars and carbs. I'm also on cholesterol and blood pressure meds, so I'm limiting . . . aaaaaagggghhhh, basically all the good stuff.
Ketogenic diet for you, no brainer!0 -
I track both!0
-
Calories to lose weight yes but Macros to lose weight efficiently. Sure anyone can drop their calories and lose weight but what will they look, feel and be once they hit that goal weight. My 2 cents
If you don't get the needed protein and fats your body isn't working as efficiently as it possibly could which means your losing more muscle (muscle burns more calories) than you have to and your hair and nails look unhealthy..
Take a 180lb man
he should eat 144 grams of protein= 576 calories
He should eat 72 grams of fat==== 648 calories
Combined these two are 1224 calories 276 calories short of what most men should be eating a day minimum (1500). Take the 276 divide by 4 you get 69 calories of carbs which is the perfect low carb diet. Throw in another 250 calories earned from walking exercise etc just to be safe and you get to eat 138 grams of carbs for a non low carb diet
assuming the person is working out.
0 -
Yes I track macros.. but they all add up to calories. I want to manage my protein to a certain level, know how much fats I'm taking in and filling the rest with carbs to meet a calorie goal.0
-
Michael190lbs wrote: »Calories to lose weight yes but Macros to lose weight efficiently. Sure anyone can drop their calories and lose weight but what will they look, feel and be once they hit that goal weight. My 2 cents
If you don't get the needed protein and fats your body isn't working as efficiently as it possibly could which means your losing more muscle (muscle burns more calories) than you have to and your hair and nails look unhealthy..
Take a 180lb man
he should eat 144 grams of protein= 576 calories
He should eat 72 grams of fat==== 648 calories
Combined these two are 1224 calories 276 calories short of what most men should be eating a day minimum (1500). Take the 276 divide by 4 you get 69 calories of carbs which is the perfect low carb diet. Throw in another 250 calories earned from walking exercise etc just to be safe and you get to eat 138 grams of carbs for a non low carb diet
assuming the person is working out.
I'm 195 and I do, I don't however believe in a low carb diet
234 grams protein
195 grams carbs
40 grams fat
~2000 calories a day.. I'm usually getting to about 1700.0 -
maillemaker wrote: »If you care about weight loss, it's all about the calories. The fitness people worry about macros.
I don't know that that is true. Many people have problems with satiety. In fact, I believe you have posted many times about it. One of the ways to improve satiety is to experiment with various macro levels to find a way of eating that provides enough volume of food and keeps you feeling full longer. It is not only for "fitness people".
Yeah, this.
I also care about maintaining as much muscle as possible (maybe that makes me a fitness person?) and being healthy, and watch macros based on those goals too.0 -
Thank you all for this information, I was following the 1200 calories on MFP and I have hit a plateau and I am always hungry. I work out Mon-Fri 30-40 Min cardio (either Interval running or Stairmaster) I do strength training as well 4 times a week with Wed being my cardio only day. I need to lose at least 30 more lbs and I am having a hard time tweaking my food intake (calories vs. macros). I have gone online and I get different numbers for my macros which confuses me even more.
185lbs 5'3 online BMR is 1614.85 I have an office job so am in front of a computer all day, I walk on my breaks. I did pay the premium for MFP this month but am confused as to what macros values to enter since I get different numbers online. Can anyone help me? Thank you!
0 -
I track both calories and macro's.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 390 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 921 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions