Personal Trainer & Weight Management Certified here to help!

Options
1141517192025

Replies

  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    Options
    psulemon wrote: »
    And thanks everyone for the wishes.

    Good luck Mr and Mrs Lemon

    lemon_baby_love.jpg
  • EvgeniZyntx
    EvgeniZyntx Posts: 24,208 Member
    Options
    jofjltncb6 wrote: »
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    FatMoojor wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    I guess it may sometimes be seen as bragging?? "I eat all the junk I can fit into my calories". Obviously not in those exact words, but that is how it sometimes comes across.
    Possibly. I get people that comment all the time that they can't believe I can eat pizza, fast food, and processed foods and not gain. But, then again they are only hearing about the junk food and not the other 80% of the time of nutritious eating.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png

    I think one of the challenges is you're a active in shape individual that burns a bunch of calories. You or someone like yourself can get proper nutrition (your macros and micros) eating 80% nutritious. For someone on a lower calorie diet, it's going to be much more difficult to get needed nutrition if 20% of say 1500 calories come from candy, cakes, chips, ice cream, etc.

    Well I can hit my macro requirements in 1200 calories if I chose to. Leaving the 20% (300 calories) for chips (85 cals), Ice cream (90 cals), cookies (72 cals) because I choose the ones I like (eg Walkers pops / Quavers - Solero / Fab, McVities Rich Tea)

    And it's not like the less nutritiously rich foods you mention don't help with hitting macros too

    But it's about choice - there's no reason why people can't manage it - even if it's difficult - if they choose to / if it's important to their wellbeing

    Take a 1200 calorie diet to a registered dietician where 20% of the calories are from nutritionally less dense food (chips, cookies, candy, cake, etc) and get their thoughts .

    Why would their thoughts matter? If you are hitting your macro requirements, it doesn't mater how your intake is made up.

    Well, macros, micros and sufficient variety. Oh, and low nitrates, low trans fats, not too much iron, mix your vegetables (not too much kale or broccoli)....

    Yeah, it doesn't matter. :sick:


    are you saying it does matter or it doesn't - my filter is off

    I'm saying intake matters - it isn't just macros.
    One of the great ironies of trying to get healthy are those people that decide to go all natural and end up eating too much monolithic foods:

    too much carrots -- make you ill
    too much kale and broccoli -- make you ill
    too much vitamins - I think you get where this is going

    A phrase like "If you are hitting your macro requirements, it doesn't mater (sic) how your intake is made up." is wrong. Dietary composition matters, what doesn't matter is dat der donut or dat der sushi. Total composition matters, single items do not.

    There is a difference in context.

    We know that.

    I think we use Macro as shorthand sometimes for Macro and Micro - I try not to but I always assume that's what people mean

    Dietary composition matters over time - agreed

    And yet we burned the OP for her use of shorthand... so some shorthand "is more equal than others".

    I don't know if that's an accurate description of why OP's advice wasn't welcomed with open arms and unquestioning acceptance.

    It isn't the only reason, I was using MY shorthand.

    But it is amazing how quickly we "confirmation bias" the crap out of other people's shorthand - if it fits our thoughts its fine, if it doesn't we nitpick to death.
  • FatMoojor
    FatMoojor Posts: 483 Member
    Options
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    FatMoojor wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    I guess it may sometimes be seen as bragging?? "I eat all the junk I can fit into my calories". Obviously not in those exact words, but that is how it sometimes comes across.
    Possibly. I get people that comment all the time that they can't believe I can eat pizza, fast food, and processed foods and not gain. But, then again they are only hearing about the junk food and not the other 80% of the time of nutritious eating.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png

    I think one of the challenges is you're a active in shape individual that burns a bunch of calories. You or someone like yourself can get proper nutrition (your macros and micros) eating 80% nutritious. For someone on a lower calorie diet, it's going to be much more difficult to get needed nutrition if 20% of say 1500 calories come from candy, cakes, chips, ice cream, etc.

    Well I can hit my macro requirements in 1200 calories if I chose to. Leaving the 20% (300 calories) for chips (85 cals), Ice cream (90 cals), cookies (72 cals) because I choose the ones I like (eg Walkers pops / Quavers - Solero / Fab, McVities Rich Tea)

    And it's not like the less nutritiously rich foods you mention don't help with hitting macros too

    But it's about choice - there's no reason why people can't manage it - even if it's difficult - if they choose to / if it's important to their wellbeing

    Take a 1200 calorie diet to a registered dietician where 20% of the calories are from nutritionally less dense food (chips, cookies, candy, cake, etc) and get their thoughts .

    Why would their thoughts matter? If you are hitting your macro requirements, it doesn't mater how your intake is made up.

    Well, macros, micros and sufficient variety. Oh, and low nitrates, low trans fats, not too much iron, mix your vegetables (not too much kale or broccoli)....

    Yeah, it doesn't matter. :sick:


    are you saying it does matter or it doesn't - my filter is off

    I'm saying intake matters - it isn't just macros.
    One of the great ironies of trying to get healthy are those people that decide to go all natural and end up eating too much monolithic foods:

    too much carrots -- make you ill
    too much kale and broccoli -- make you ill
    too much vitamins - I think you get where this is going

    A phrase like "If you are hitting your macro requirements, it doesn't mater (sic) how your intake is made up." is wrong. Dietary composition matters, what doesn't matter is dat der donut or dat der sushi. Total composition matters, single items do not.

    There is a difference in context.

    I would generally assume that if someone was consuming say 1500 calories and that they intake consisted of say 50% carbs, 30% Fat, 20% protein and that they were hitting those percentages and also staying within the 1500 calorie range that there is a very good chance that they aren't eating too many carrots or too much kale and broccoli.

    Please explain to me how someone could hit their calorie count and all their macros and their dietary composition be completely out of whack? I would be very interested in a daily diary entry for that.
  • snickerscharlie
    snickerscharlie Posts: 8,578 Member
    Options
    Wishing the Lemons all the best! <3
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    psulemon wrote: »
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    FatMoojor wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    I guess it may sometimes be seen as bragging?? "I eat all the junk I can fit into my calories". Obviously not in those exact words, but that is how it sometimes comes across.
    Possibly. I get people that comment all the time that they can't believe I can eat pizza, fast food, and processed foods and not gain. But, then again they are only hearing about the junk food and not the other 80% of the time of nutritious eating.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png

    I think one of the challenges is you're a active in shape individual that burns a bunch of calories. You or someone like yourself can get proper nutrition (your macros and micros) eating 80% nutritious. For someone on a lower calorie diet, it's going to be much more difficult to get needed nutrition if 20% of say 1500 calories come from candy, cakes, chips, ice cream, etc.

    Well I can hit my macro requirements in 1200 calories if I chose to. Leaving the 20% (300 calories) for chips (85 cals), Ice cream (90 cals), cookies (72 cals) because I choose the ones I like (eg Walkers pops / Quavers - Solero / Fab, McVities Rich Tea)

    And it's not like the less nutritiously rich foods you mention don't help with hitting macros too

    But it's about choice - there's no reason why people can't manage it - even if it's difficult - if they choose to / if it's important to their wellbeing

    Take a 1200 calorie diet to a registered dietician where 20% of the calories are from nutritionally less dense food (chips, cookies, candy, cake, etc) and get their thoughts .

    Why would their thoughts matter? If you are hitting your macro requirements, it doesn't mater how your intake is made up.

    so what is your thought on this statement @psulemon ?
    does it fit with your 80/20 rule, or it is just me struggling again with reading comprehension?

    I wasn't aware that psulemon was the translator of all posts on MFP and the one who determines if everyone's diet was appropriate for them. Wow that's a lot of responsibility @psulemon! You should ask them to double your mod salary! ;)

    Its ok. I am always willing to provide some perspective. And i got time right now while my wife is progressing during her labor.

    Very cool! Best wishes to all of you!
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,395 MFP Moderator
    edited November 2015
    Options
    FatMoojor wrote: »
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    FatMoojor wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    I guess it may sometimes be seen as bragging?? "I eat all the junk I can fit into my calories". Obviously not in those exact words, but that is how it sometimes comes across.
    Possibly. I get people that comment all the time that they can't believe I can eat pizza, fast food, and processed foods and not gain. But, then again they are only hearing about the junk food and not the other 80% of the time of nutritious eating.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png

    I think one of the challenges is you're a active in shape individual that burns a bunch of calories. You or someone like yourself can get proper nutrition (your macros and micros) eating 80% nutritious. For someone on a lower calorie diet, it's going to be much more difficult to get needed nutrition if 20% of say 1500 calories come from candy, cakes, chips, ice cream, etc.

    Well I can hit my macro requirements in 1200 calories if I chose to. Leaving the 20% (300 calories) for chips (85 cals), Ice cream (90 cals), cookies (72 cals) because I choose the ones I like (eg Walkers pops / Quavers - Solero / Fab, McVities Rich Tea)

    And it's not like the less nutritiously rich foods you mention don't help with hitting macros too

    But it's about choice - there's no reason why people can't manage it - even if it's difficult - if they choose to / if it's important to their wellbeing

    Take a 1200 calorie diet to a registered dietician where 20% of the calories are from nutritionally less dense food (chips, cookies, candy, cake, etc) and get their thoughts .

    Why would their thoughts matter? If you are hitting your macro requirements, it doesn't mater how your intake is made up.

    Well, macros, micros and sufficient variety. Oh, and low nitrates, low trans fats, not too much iron, mix your vegetables (not too much kale or broccoli)....

    Yeah, it doesn't matter. :sick:


    are you saying it does matter or it doesn't - my filter is off

    I'm saying intake matters - it isn't just macros.
    One of the great ironies of trying to get healthy are those people that decide to go all natural and end up eating too much monolithic foods:

    too much carrots -- make you ill
    too much kale and broccoli -- make you ill
    too much vitamins - I think you get where this is going

    A phrase like "If you are hitting your macro requirements, it doesn't mater (sic) how your intake is made up." is wrong. Dietary composition matters, what doesn't matter is dat der donut or dat der sushi. Total composition matters, single items do not.

    There is a difference in context.

    I would generally assume that if someone was consuming say 1500 calories and that they intake consisted of say 50% carbs, 30% Fat, 20% protein and that they were hitting those percentages and also staying within the 1500 calorie range that there is a very good chance that they aren't eating too many carrots or too much kale and broccoli.

    Please explain to me how someone could hit their calorie count and all their macros and their dietary composition be completely out of whack? I would be very interested in a daily diary entry for that.

    My perceptive - you can see if a lot with people converting to lifestyles (vegetarian/vegan or lchf) without educating themselves on what foods are requires to address nutritional requirements (protein in vegetarians, too low fat intake in lchf or even too little sodium). In fact, i have known a few people hospitalized for it.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options

    jofjltncb6 wrote: »
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    FatMoojor wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    I guess it may sometimes be seen as bragging?? "I eat all the junk I can fit into my calories". Obviously not in those exact words, but that is how it sometimes comes across.
    Possibly. I get people that comment all the time that they can't believe I can eat pizza, fast food, and processed foods and not gain. But, then again they are only hearing about the junk food and not the other 80% of the time of nutritious eating.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png

    I think one of the challenges is you're a active in shape individual that burns a bunch of calories. You or someone like yourself can get proper nutrition (your macros and micros) eating 80% nutritious. For someone on a lower calorie diet, it's going to be much more difficult to get needed nutrition if 20% of say 1500 calories come from candy, cakes, chips, ice cream, etc.

    Well I can hit my macro requirements in 1200 calories if I chose to. Leaving the 20% (300 calories) for chips (85 cals), Ice cream (90 cals), cookies (72 cals) because I choose the ones I like (eg Walkers pops / Quavers - Solero / Fab, McVities Rich Tea)

    And it's not like the less nutritiously rich foods you mention don't help with hitting macros too

    But it's about choice - there's no reason why people can't manage it - even if it's difficult - if they choose to / if it's important to their wellbeing

    Take a 1200 calorie diet to a registered dietician where 20% of the calories are from nutritionally less dense food (chips, cookies, candy, cake, etc) and get their thoughts .

    Why would their thoughts matter? If you are hitting your macro requirements, it doesn't mater how your intake is made up.

    Well, macros, micros and sufficient variety. Oh, and low nitrates, low trans fats, not too much iron, mix your vegetables (not too much kale or broccoli)....

    Yeah, it doesn't matter. :sick:


    are you saying it does matter or it doesn't - my filter is off

    I'm saying intake matters - it isn't just macros.
    One of the great ironies of trying to get healthy are those people that decide to go all natural and end up eating too much monolithic foods:

    too much carrots -- make you ill
    too much kale and broccoli -- make you ill
    too much vitamins - I think you get where this is going

    A phrase like "If you are hitting your macro requirements, it doesn't mater (sic) how your intake is made up." is wrong. Dietary composition matters, what doesn't matter is dat der donut or dat der sushi. Total composition matters, single items do not.

    There is a difference in context.

    We know that.

    I think we use Macro as shorthand sometimes for Macro and Micro - I try not to but I always assume that's what people mean

    Dietary composition matters over time - agreed

    And yet we burned the OP for her use of shorthand... so some shorthand "is more equal than others".

    I don't know if that's an accurate description of why OP's advice wasn't welcomed with open arms and unquestioning acceptance.

    I don't think it is. My own posts earlier in the thread are an example (as are many others), and OP didn't bother to respond at all.
  • JustMissTracy
    JustMissTracy Posts: 6,339 Member
    Options
    asimmons26 wrote: »
    Most calorie strategies for weight loss have a downfall. The reason is all calories are not created equal. Your best bet is to just worry about eating clean and drinking half your body weight in ounces of water each day. Your BMR doesn't stay the same. (As you stated) The better fit or unfit you become you would need to recalculate everything. Temperature also changes your BMR so to go strictly off of a calculation like TDEE would need to be an estimate only. Don't even bother with that. Stay away from whites (rice, bread, pasta). These should only be eaten for special occasions. Replace these with Ezekiel bread, quinoa, etc. Get creative with your veggies, no butter. Your veggies should be the biggest portion on your plate.

    No butter? I love butter! I dunno, I've managed to lose over 80 lbs altogether to date, and we still go thru a bar of unsalted butter every two weeks.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    Options
    125goals wrote: »
    Why is hitting your micros so important and what if you don't hit them?

    "Micros" is just another way to refer to vitamins and minerals. If you don't get the vitamins and minerals you need, deficiencies will result.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    I guess it may sometimes be seen as bragging?? "I eat all the junk I can fit into my calories". Obviously not in those exact words, but that is how it sometimes comes across.
    Possibly. I get people that comment all the time that they can't believe I can eat pizza, fast food, and processed foods and not gain. But, then again they are only hearing about the junk food and not the other 80% of the time of nutritious eating.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png

    I think one of the challenges is you're a active in shape individual that burns a bunch of calories. You or someone like yourself can get proper nutrition (your macros and micros) eating 80% nutritious. For someone on a lower calorie diet, it's going to be much more difficult to get needed nutrition if 20% of say 1500 calories come from candy, cakes, chips, ice cream, etc.
    That'd be 1200 calories to use on nutritious food and I believe if someone is committed to it, that wouldn't be that hard to fulfill.

    This is true -- having done 1250 for a while I know it's possible to construct a healthy diet on few calories. Yes, I didn't have much room for extras (one reason it's easier for me when I'm working out). I think the recommendations about 120 "empty" calories (by which they are referring to sat fat and added sugar specifically, although alcohol would certainly fit) for the woman with 1600 calories is based on the idea that most people don't plan out their diets that much. When I was eating 1250, I was also eating above the recommended amounts of vegetables, for example, as vegetables don't have that many calories. I also was careful to eat adequate protein and took other steps to make sure I had a good diet. When I ended up with more calories, I didn't really change the basics, so I think I was eating quite well with 1600 too, even if I included 200 calories of ice cream at the end of the day.
  • FatMoojor
    FatMoojor Posts: 483 Member
    Options
    psulemon wrote: »
    FatMoojor wrote: »
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    FatMoojor wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    I guess it may sometimes be seen as bragging?? "I eat all the junk I can fit into my calories". Obviously not in those exact words, but that is how it sometimes comes across.
    Possibly. I get people that comment all the time that they can't believe I can eat pizza, fast food, and processed foods and not gain. But, then again they are only hearing about the junk food and not the other 80% of the time of nutritious eating.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png

    I think one of the challenges is you're a active in shape individual that burns a bunch of calories. You or someone like yourself can get proper nutrition (your macros and micros) eating 80% nutritious. For someone on a lower calorie diet, it's going to be much more difficult to get needed nutrition if 20% of say 1500 calories come from candy, cakes, chips, ice cream, etc.

    Well I can hit my macro requirements in 1200 calories if I chose to. Leaving the 20% (300 calories) for chips (85 cals), Ice cream (90 cals), cookies (72 cals) because I choose the ones I like (eg Walkers pops / Quavers - Solero / Fab, McVities Rich Tea)

    And it's not like the less nutritiously rich foods you mention don't help with hitting macros too

    But it's about choice - there's no reason why people can't manage it - even if it's difficult - if they choose to / if it's important to their wellbeing

    Take a 1200 calorie diet to a registered dietician where 20% of the calories are from nutritionally less dense food (chips, cookies, candy, cake, etc) and get their thoughts .

    Why would their thoughts matter? If you are hitting your macro requirements, it doesn't mater how your intake is made up.

    Well, macros, micros and sufficient variety. Oh, and low nitrates, low trans fats, not too much iron, mix your vegetables (not too much kale or broccoli)....

    Yeah, it doesn't matter. :sick:


    are you saying it does matter or it doesn't - my filter is off

    I'm saying intake matters - it isn't just macros.
    One of the great ironies of trying to get healthy are those people that decide to go all natural and end up eating too much monolithic foods:

    too much carrots -- make you ill
    too much kale and broccoli -- make you ill
    too much vitamins - I think you get where this is going

    A phrase like "If you are hitting your macro requirements, it doesn't mater (sic) how your intake is made up." is wrong. Dietary composition matters, what doesn't matter is dat der donut or dat der sushi. Total composition matters, single items do not.

    There is a difference in context.

    I would generally assume that if someone was consuming say 1500 calories and that they intake consisted of say 50% carbs, 30% Fat, 20% protein and that they were hitting those percentages and also staying within the 1500 calorie range that there is a very good chance that they aren't eating too many carrots or too much kale and broccoli.

    Please explain to me how someone could hit their calorie count and all their macros and their dietary composition be completely out of whack? I would be very interested in a daily diary entry for that.

    My perceptive - you can see if a lot with people converting to lifestyles (vegetarian/vegan or lchf) without educating themselves on what foods are requires to address nutritional requirements (protein in vegetarians, too low fat intake in lchf or even too little sodium). In fact, i have known a few people hospitalized for it.

    But then you have people who aren't hitting their macros and therefore are removed from the group of people who are doing as I said and are hitting calories and their macros.

  • DeguelloTex
    DeguelloTex Posts: 6,652 Member
    Options
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    I guess it may sometimes be seen as bragging?? "I eat all the junk I can fit into my calories". Obviously not in those exact words, but that is how it sometimes comes across.
    Possibly. I get people that comment all the time that they can't believe I can eat pizza, fast food, and processed foods and not gain. But, then again they are only hearing about the junk food and not the other 80% of the time of nutritious eating.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png

    I think one of the challenges is you're a active in shape individual that burns a bunch of calories. You or someone like yourself can get proper nutrition (your macros and micros) eating 80% nutritious. For someone on a lower calorie diet, it's going to be much more difficult to get needed nutrition if 20% of say 1500 calories come from candy, cakes, chips, ice cream, etc.

    Well I can hit my macro requirements in 1200 calories if I chose to. Leaving the 20% (300 calories) for chips (85 cals), Ice cream (90 cals), cookies (72 cals) because I choose the ones I like (eg Walkers pops / Quavers - Solero / Fab, McVities Rich Tea)

    And it's not like the less nutritiously rich foods you mention don't help with hitting macros too

    But it's about choice - there's no reason why people can't manage it - even if it's difficult - if they choose to / if it's important to their wellbeing

    Take a 1200 calorie a day diet to a registered dietician where 20% of the calories are from nutritionally less dense food (chips, cookies, candy, cake, etc) and get their thoughts .
    Why would the fact that different people have different amount of "flexible" calories available invalidate the concept?
  • Bama1818
    Bama1818 Posts: 32 Member
    Options
    Im hitting around 2200 calories a day started into weight lifting about three weeks ago on top of doing cardio. My stats are male, 30, 255lbs , 6'2 height. Im not noticing the scale move at all past two weeks. I usually run 50P/30C/20F macros. My diary should be open so any help would be greatly appreciated.
  • jofjltncb6
    jofjltncb6 Posts: 34,415 Member
    Options
    125goals wrote: »
    Why is hitting your micros so important and what if you don't hit them?

    "Micros" is just another way to refer to vitamins and minerals. If you don't get the vitamins and minerals you need, deficiencies will result.

    But to be clear, our bodies don't work on a 24 hour clock. Maintaining nutritional health isn't dependent on hitting some magic number in every category every day. This is why variety is good...and likely more important than other qualities that get more focus (such as organic, "clean", etc).

    I suspect a dirty diet with variety will likely be healthier than a monolithic clean diet.

    One benefit though...it leads to those humorously ridiculous comparisons of extremes where people argue 1500 calories of broccoli is healthier than 1500 calories of doughnuts. (It isn't.)
  • EvgeniZyntx
    EvgeniZyntx Posts: 24,208 Member
    edited November 2015
    Options
    125goals wrote: »
    Why is hitting your micros so important and what if you don't hit them?

    "Micros" is just another way to refer to vitamins and minerals. If you don't get the vitamins and minerals you need, deficiencies will result.

    Not a very satisfying answer - Deficiency means "not getting enough vitamins"...

    The issue is that it can lead any of a variety of issues such as mood disorder, hair loss, bone issue, anaemia, protein absorption issues, increased risk of certain diseases or .... nothing at all.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    Options
    125goals wrote: »
    Why is hitting your micros so important and what if you don't hit them?

    "Micros" is just another way to refer to vitamins and minerals. If you don't get the vitamins and minerals you need, deficiencies will result.

    Not a very satisfying answer - Deficiency means "not getting enough vitamins"...

    The issue is that it can lead any of a variety of issues such as mood disorder, hair loss, bone issue, anaemia, protein absorption issues, increased risk of certain diseases or .... nothing at all.

    I would agree if you mean the answer is "vague," but I don't think that necessarily makes it unsatisfying. Deficiencies have many different symptoms that vary depending on what you're deficient in. That's why I didn't name any specific symptoms.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    Options
    jofjltncb6 wrote: »
    125goals wrote: »
    Why is hitting your micros so important and what if you don't hit them?

    "Micros" is just another way to refer to vitamins and minerals. If you don't get the vitamins and minerals you need, deficiencies will result.

    But to be clear, our bodies don't work on a 24 hour clock. Maintaining nutritional health isn't dependent on hitting some magic number in every category every day. This is why variety is good...and likely more important than other qualities that get more focus (such as organic, "clean", etc).

    I suspect a dirty diet with variety will likely be healthier than a monolithic clean diet.

    One benefit though...it leads to those humorously ridiculous comparisons of extremes where people argue 1500 calories of broccoli is healthier than 1500 calories of doughnuts. (It isn't.)

    I agree -- within the context of a 24-hour day, being short in anything isn't going to be an issue.
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 27,951 Member
    Options
    Here's one meme to address both psulemon's new baby and the empty calories tangent:

    MEMES-2014-When-Life-Gives-You-Lemons.jpg
  • leanne0627
    leanne0627 Posts: 109 Member
    Options
    have a question if any of you can help. I've been exercising and trying to eat healthier for about 8 months now and have lost about 50 lbs and went from a size 18 to a size 9. so I've had some success and i feel great, but i still weigh 180 lbs. im a female about 5 7". it seems i barely ever lose any scale weight yet i keep having to buy new clothes. yet they say you cant build muscle in a deficit so it makes me wonder if im not in a deficit? i should be as i do 2 hours of exercise days a week. i also only seem to lose in chuncks. weight stays the same for 3 weeks then i lose 5 lbs overnight. one time i lose 10 lbs in 3 days after not losing for 5 weeks. it makes it very hard to stay motivated and track my food when no matter what i do im not seeing the scale move. any help or explanations would be great. thank you
  • DeguelloTex
    DeguelloTex Posts: 6,652 Member
    Options
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    Here's one meme to address both psulemon's new baby and the empty calories tangent:

    MEMES-2014-When-Life-Gives-You-Lemons.jpg

    Not unless you have someone willing to trade you some limes for those lemons.