Macros: To change or not to change?

I do 40/30/30 - and I just went to look at my "goals" on MFP and they are reset to default (not by me) and unable to be edited at the moment. Grr.

Edit: I was able to change them back. Really, I focus on at least meeting the 30% protein goal (if I go over a little, no biggie) and the 30% fat goal (similarly, I don't sweat exceeding this a bit), and let the carbs fall where they may - within my calories for the day. I often exceed recommended fiber (included in the carb goal). I feel the best with this.

I was going to link a post that goes into deep details about macros but:

juggernaut1974 wrote: »

Percentages are hard to generalize. It's preferable to calculate macro needs in grams, then back into the percentages.

For protein - eat a minimum of 0.6-0.8 grams per pound (roughly 110-150 grams; 440-600 calories)
For fat, eat a minimum of 0.3-0.4 grams per pound (roughly 55-75 grams; 495-675 calories)

And fill in the rest however you like.

..it would have boiled down to exactly this ^^^^

bsbprincess wrote: »

Thank you guys!!! I couldn't get fat that high without cutting out carbs... and this is my minimum calorie count so I suppose they'll go up the days I work out... How does this look? Again, I weigh 187 right now... I feel like fat is high. Is it really supposed to be that high?

Calories 1200
Carbohydrates 60 g 20 %
Fat 53 g 40 %
Protein 120 g 40 %

How did you come to the overall 1200 calorie goal? That seems a bit low for someone with your stats and activity level.

bsbprincess wrote: »

I am 29, 5'9", weigh 187, and looking to get down to 150 for now. I have 40% body fat (*cringes*) according to my fitbit aria scale, so that's important to note possibly.

Probably not -- those things aren't accurate. I wouldn't worry about that until you get to the 150 and then you will be better able to judge where you are.

My question is, should I change my macros from the default or leave them? Some people tell me to eat mostly protein, but I feel like that would be hard for me to get that all in. However, if the general consensus is that I should, then I can work on it.

Right now they're set at: Carbs: 50% Fat: 30% and Protein: 20%

No, no need to eat mostly protein -- there's no basis for that.

What there is, is evidence that eating about .65-.85 grams of protein per lb of healthy body weight can be helpful in not losing more muscle than necessary (as is having a moderate goal and not cutting calories too low and, of course, doing some weight-bearing exercise).

For you, that protein range would be about 100 to 125 grams or 400-500 calories. What percentage that is depends on your calorie goal. I did 30% protein when losing and do about 20% at maintenance -- same basic number based on my weight.

As for carbs vs. fat, IMO, doesn't really matter. Some find having more fat is more satisfying and leaves them less hungry, others find they feel more energetic when they have more carbs, still others (like me) find it doesn't make a huge difference (although I do feel better with at least 40% as I do lots of cardio and it does make a difference to my training and energy and have read that more can be helpful so I'm experimenting with that).

What I think is more important if you are trying to maximize health and body composition is to generally eat an overall healthful diet and get in your nutrition, although that doesn't mean to the exclusion of everything else. Beyond that, track for a while and see if you tend to notice a difference.

bsbprincess wrote: »

So having that high of fat grams in my diet won't be unhealthy? I don't need heart problems on top of being fat :P

Well your body does require a certain amount of minimum good fat for vitamin absorption and organ function. It's still recommended to minimize saturated fats and trans fats, but other than that, the 'low-fat' craze of the 90's has been widely deemed to be counterproductive.

bsbprincess wrote: »

juggernaut1974 wrote: »

Well your body does require a certain amount of minimum good fat for vitamin absorption and organ function. It's still recommended to minimize saturated fats and trans fats, but other than that, the 'low-fat' craze of the 90's has been widely deemed to be counterproductive.

didn't know that! Thank you!

Are you thinking my calorie goal is too low? The reason I wanted it there is because I do very little on the days I don't work out, so i didn't want to un-do my workouts

In my opinion yes.

Remember - your body burns calories all day long - even if you're just sitting there.

There are a number of online calculators you can use to estimate...I used this one: http://www.iifym.com/tdee-calculator/

I put in your stats, and estimated your activity level to be "sedentary" and that you did 4 days/30 minutes per day of moderate exercise.

That estimated your TDEE (average daily total calorie burn) at around 2000. So you should lose 1 lb per week by eating 1500. The number would be higher if I've underestimated your activity in any way.

I'd recommend that 1 lb per week is a much more reasonable rate of loss for someone looking to lose less than 40 lbs than 2 lbs per week.

bsbprincess wrote: »

I would call it moderate, so I think that's right on.

Wow, I guess I was being too hard on myself. Before, when I was doing well on WW, I had lost 60 lbs and was eating 1400 and stopped losing. I asked people on another forum and they told me to eat more. Soon after that I lost my way and have since gained about half back. It seems that again I am being too strict.

I can't thank you enough for taking the time to help me. I really appreciate it

You're very welcome.

Remember - ultimately the BEST method is simply trial and error. Pick a way...whatever advice you choose...and stick with it for 4 weeks or more and assess your results. If they're not matching expectations, or if you're having issues sticking to the plan - make some tweaks.

If you're patient and consistent, you'll succeed in the long run.