New to the concept of Macros

Options
beth1079
beth1079 Posts: 12 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
I am a 36 year old female. 5'3". Currently 196 lbs with a goal of 140. In January, as a suggestion by my doctor, I started tracking my food. What I found is my food choices weren't that bad. I just ate way too much for my activity level. I was a grazer and the type of person that would finish the kid's leftovers as to not waste it. I have been successful in losing weight so far just by cutting portions (started at 207 and am currently at 196). For the past 2 weeks I have been using the default goal settings that MFP set up for me. 1200 calories a day. 50% carbs, 20% protein & 30% fat. I feel good with these settings but I don't know how logical it is in the long run with my goals of fat loss and wanting to tone up.

I'm a stay-at-home mom. I don't consider myself too active. I borrowed my brother's fitbit and on a "normal" day I get in anywhere from 4000-8000 steps just doing my everyday around the house stuff. Occasionally (maybe twice a week) I'll hit 10,000-12,000 steps if I'm able to get out for a good walk. I've incorporated some strength training (mainly using my own body weight) but fat loss is my main goal at the moment. My sleep is terrible (thanks to a 1 year old who is still not sleeping through the night) with an average of 4-5 hours of sleep a night.

I don't want to get burned out from not eating enough. I'm in this for the long haul.

The whole concept of Macro's is so new to me. Just reading this forum there is a wealth of knowledge but there are so many different suggestions it's starting to make my head spin. The range seems to be pretty dramatic. Anywhere between 1200-1792 calories a day. Protein, Carbs and Fat range is so different too. Do I continue with the current MFP settings or Scoobysworkshop settings or the setting that iifym calculated???

Replies

  • peaceout_aly
    peaceout_aly Posts: 2,018 Member
    Options
    Personally, I like MFP's automatically assigned macro's. They have successfully worked for myself and many others. Most of us here focus mainly on meeting our calorie and protein goals. I've recently started watching carbs and sugars as well, but disregard the fat content. The main goal is to eat foods lower in calories, yet packed with nutritional content instead of being sugar-based and crap-filled.
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,293 Member
    edited February 2016
    Options
    the probelm with % is that you may not get enough fat or protein if your total calories are low (as 1200 is) At such a low caloric intake I would suggest 30% protein, 30% fat, and 40% carbs, use the protein and fat as minimums and carbs as a max, maybe even increase the fat to 35% and drop carbs to 40%
  • juggernaut1974
    juggernaut1974 Posts: 6,212 Member
    edited February 2016
    Options
    If you're having good results both with weight loss and satiety (ie - you're not ravenously hungry on your caloric goal) - then I wouldn't monkey too much with the default macro settings.

    Generally speaking, it's recommended that you view protein (0.6g per pound of weight) and fat (0.3g per pound of weight) as minimum goals to hit, and let everything else fall where you're comfortable.

    I've found that just by eating a good variety of generally highly nutritious foods, and adding in a couple small treats each day, I can hit those goals without micro-managing things too much.

    ETA: I would however, up your calorie goal a bit - 1400 would seem to be a more reasonable goal based on the stats you posted above. You don't need to starve yourself to lose weight in a healthy manner.
  • Yi5hedr3
    Yi5hedr3 Posts: 2,696 Member
    Options
    Go to 1300, but cut carbs, raise fats. Set macros 20/20/60. Buy some coconut oil.
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,293 Member
    Options
    peaceout_aly wrote: »
    Personally, I like MFP's automatically assigned macro's. They have successfully worked for myself and many others. Most of us here focus mainly on meeting our calorie and protein goals. I've recently started watching carbs and sugars as well, but disregard the fat content. The main goal is to eat foods lower in calories, yet packed with nutritional content instead of being sugar-based and crap-filled.

    I would argue that, fat is full of calories and should not be avoided. fat helps the absorption of certain vitamins and minerals, as well as being good for digestive health, hair, nails, skin, etc. No reason to watch or limit sugar, unless diabetic, sugar is just a carb and if you are already counting those, no reason to track sugar on its own.
  • skittlebitz
    skittlebitz Posts: 29 Member
    Options
    My suggestion is to start out at the highest end that you can (in this case 1792) and keep it at that until you stop seeing fat loss progress at a bi-weekly basis. Do NOT weigh yourself everyday, your body fluctuates wayyy too much for that! After you stop seeing fat loss drop it another say 100 calories a day and keep it at that till you stop seeing progress. If you start too low you have nowhere to create a deficit from when weight loss stalls!
  • beth1079
    beth1079 Posts: 12 Member
    Options
    Is the 0.6g per pound of weight for protein and 0.3g per pound of weight for fat based off my current weight of 196 or for my "ideal BMI" weight of 140? I'm not concerned about the fats but when I consume higher amounts of protein I don't feel as well.

    Today I upped my calorie count to 1400 but kept my macros the same at 50% carbs, 20% protein & 30% fat.
  • goldthistime
    goldthistime Posts: 3,214 Member
    Options
    I'm a fan of the macro setting you have currently. But I really only pay attention to the 20% protein. I aim to meet or exceed that each and every day. 1400 is certainly better than 1200 but if you catch yourself too hungry or fatigued or binging, up it a little more. You shouldn't have to suffer to do this. In fact, suffering makes you more likely to "fall off the wagon" and may make you procrastinate climbing back on.

Categories