nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Macro nutrient ratios for fat loss

cranberry509

Good morning everybody,
I've started my fat loss challenge back in March and have lost 10 pounds already.

I'm an endomorphic so I assume I should stick to low carb diet and it seems to be working for me.

However, I wonder if it's SAFE to be on:
45% Protein
30% Carb
25% Fat

for a prolonged period of time?

Any thoughts?

Replies

TavistockToad

Being endomorphic isn't actually a thing.

Are you worried about that amount of protein being safe? How much is it in grams?

cranberry509

Yes, Im worried about my protein intake. It's about 135 grams per day

TavistockToad

cranberry509 wrote: »

Yes, Im worried about my protein intake. It's about 135 grams per day

That's not too much, unless you have medical problems with your kidneys.

ReaderGirl3

Macro ratios don't matter for weight loss, eating at the correct calorie deficit for your weight loss goals does.

jonsmithkidd

Perfectly safe and a high protein intake will help maintain muscle mass while you lose weight. However, as has been said, the macro split should always be a secondary consideration after calories, that is what you want to focus on.

cranberry509

Thanks guys.

yarwell

45% calories from protein would generally be regarded as "excessive". It's well above the AMDR.

kommodevaran

It's not usafe, but it can be difficult to create a tasty and delicious menu, and if you get bored, it's easier to quit - but if it works for you, it's great. The amount of fat is on the very low side though. And the carbs aren't particularly low for "low carb". Body type doesn't really matter for choice of diet anyway (only food preference does), but are you sure 1200 calories is right for you? How much have you got to lose and what have you set your weekly goal to?

SezxyStef

ReaderGirl3 wrote: »

Macro ratios don't matter for weight loss, eating at the correct calorie deficit for your weight loss goals does.

cecsav1

TavistockToad wrote: »

Being endomorphic isn't actually a thing.

THANK YOU!

Somatypes were actually created in the realm of psychology to attempt to predetermine someone's personality by body shape.

lemurcat12

It's not unsafe (135 g), and that ratio might help you feel more satiated on your 1200 calories (I did the math). But it also could mean that you struggle to put together satisfying meals, depending on how you eat, especially since you are eating only about 33 g of fat. One common recommendation is to get around .8 g of fat per lb of goal weight and at least .3 g of fat per lb of weight (although I expect that's flexible if you have lots to lose). Mostly what matters is calories and having a diet/macro breakdown (if it matters to you) that helps you feel satisfied and happy on reduced calories. When I was doing 1250 I had higher than normal protein (about 35%) since it helped me feel satisfied on the low calories and worked with how I enjoyed eating (I was also eating lots of vegetables for volume, which are low calorie).

Also, your cat is beautiful.

cranberry509

kommodevaran wrote: »

The amount of fat is on the very low side though. And the carbs aren't particularly low for "low carb".

I aimed to stick to "low carb" diet and ratios, however I found it difficult, especially in terms of low carbs. Should I consider an increase of amount of fat and decrease of carbs and proteins?

kommodevaran wrote: »

but are you sure 1200 calories is right for you? How much have you got to lose and what have you set your weekly goal to?

My weight is 84 kgs at the moment, I wish I could loose another 14 kgs. I try to stick to 1200 kcal/day, I do not attend the gym at present, I set my goal to 1 kgs per week, however I loose less than that (possibly because my diary entries are not accurate). The positive side of the story is that I noticed I am not hungry between meals, I feel well and I loose weight. And, importantly, I remove, gradually, from my plate all rubish, I used to eat.

rollerjog

the magic macro nutrient ratios LOL is there really one, everybodys different what works for you might not work for someone else, find out what works for you and stick with it, the way i figure out how many macro nutrients i need is figure out what your lean body mass is, say your lean mass is 150 i take in 1 gram for every pound of lean body mass, 150 grams would be my protein, as for fat i go by how many calories im taking in a day so if im taking in say 2500 calories a day i would go any were from 20% to 30% of the calories im taking a day from fat so 20% of 2500 would be 55grams of fat, 30% would be 83 grams then i fill the rest of the calories in with carbs thats what works for me

kommodevaran

cranberry509 wrote: »

kommodevaran wrote: »

The amount of fat is on the very low side though. And the carbs aren't particularly low for "low carb".

I aimed to stick to "low carb" diet and ratios, however I found it difficult, especially in terms of low carbs. Should I consider an increase of amount of fat and decrease of carbs and proteins?

I think anything that makes sticking to calorie allowance difficult, should be avoided. Your need for protein and fat is pretty constant, I recommend as a starting point to have 1 - 1.5 grams of each per kilo of body weight at normal weight. That's still a quite wide range. Carbs provide energy, variety and taste, and are carriers of fiber, vitamins and minerals (all of which are important, so don't cut them out) and the intake of carbs should vary according to energy needs - if you are overweight/sedentary, reduce them, if you are underweight and/or train a lot, increase them.

cranberry509 wrote: »

kommodevaran wrote: »

but are you sure 1200 calories is right for you? How much have you got to lose and what have you set your weekly goal to?

My weight is 84 kgs at the moment, I wish I could loose another 14 kgs. I try to stick to 1200 kcal/day, I do not attend the gym at present, I set my goal to 1 kgs per week, however I loose less than that (possibly because my diary entries are not accurate). The positive side of the story is that I noticed I am not hungry between meals, I feel well and I loose weight. And, importantly, I remove, gradually, from my plate all rubish, I used to eat.

If 70 kilos is a good weight for you, I assume you are around 170 cm. Your height and weight determines what amount of calories that is right for you to lose weight. With only 30 pounds to lose, your weekly goal should be set to 1 pound - you won't lose faster, just because your body can't lose fat faster. More calories to play with will also make you more inclined to track accurately, which in turn will make your loss more predictable, and you will most likely be happier.

You don't have to go to the gym, but any increase in activity, as long as it feels goods, is good for you, and it adds to calories burned. You don't have to stop eating "rubbish", but eat less of it, and more rarely, and instead focus on getting in enough "real" food, and some food from every food group every day. A symphony of colors from fruit and vegetables is nice to look at, when prepared correctly it tastes good, and it helps you get in all the nutrients you need.

jessiethe3rd

If you want to keep your muscles then macro ratios are important. Losing weight is certainly easy with a calorie deficit. Keeping it off and having your body look great requires exercise, protein, and plenty of healthy fats. Calorie deficit also doesn't reset you hypothalamus. Your set weight is very different to get past (I have found) without some assistance... Ketosis is a good way to help that.

I'm 60% fat, 35% protein. 5% carbs.

I basically eat a lot of healthy oil. I get to cook in animal fat for instance. The possibilities are endless... And well my frame is gaining muscle and the body fat is reducing.

Of course my goal may be different then yours...
10% and below body fat. Make sure you cosider what outcome you want to accomplish. If its just pure body weight loss go for the macronutrient ratio you set. Otherwise look into a ratio that focuses on fat and healthy oils from grassfed animals.

Jcl81

1.Weight loss for retaining muscle when lifting weights: Make sure you're in the range of 80-150 grams of protien. (depending on sex, height, age, activity levels) After that macro is hit stay in a caloric range.

Needed: Resistance with adequate protien while in a certain caloric number to maintain any muscle, sometimes more muscle is added.

2.Weight loss without exercise: Just worry about a caloric total, (number of calories) an average person will still get 40- 60 grams of protien which is the norm.

Needed: A caloric number is all you need to worry about if you just want the scale to go down and are not trying to keep muscle or exercising.

Ratios are preference, some people like low carb some high. Some people like high fat some like low fat.

If I were bulking I would do the same thing, but it would just be slightly higher protien because the calories are higher and that automatically makes all ratios go up on their own.

I found for me, I don't want to just be smaller version of myself with no muscle when losing weight so I use heavy weight, what is heavy to me and hit my protien mark while staying in a certain caloric state. It's that simple.

Don't over think this, there is no real reason unless you go on stage, or this is a job and you need to take it more serious.

If you have a medical condition ask a Dr.

Maxematics

jessiethe3rd wrote: »

If you want to keep your muscles then macro ratios are important. Losing weight is certainly easy with a calorie deficit. Keeping it off and having your body look great requires exercise, protein, and plenty of healthy fats. Calorie deficit also doesn't reset you hypothalamus. Your set weight is very different to get past (I have found) without some assistance... Ketosis is a good way to help that.

I'm 60% fat, 35% protein. 5% carbs.

I basically eat a lot of healthy oil. I get to cook in animal fat for instance. The possibilities are endless... And well my frame is gaining muscle and the body fat is reducing.

Of course my goal may be different then yours...
10% and below body fat. Make sure you cosider what outcome you want to accomplish. If its just pure body weight loss go for the macronutrient ratio you set. Otherwise look into a ratio that focuses on fat and healthy oils from grassfed animals.

I have two words for most of this comment: Bro Science.

Afura

synacious wrote: »

jessiethe3rd wrote: »

If you want to keep your muscles then macro ratios are important. Losing weight is certainly easy with a calorie deficit. Keeping it off and having your body look great requires exercise, protein, and plenty of healthy fats. Calorie deficit also doesn't reset you hypothalamus. Your set weight is very different to get past (I have found) without some assistance... Ketosis is a good way to help that.

I'm 60% fat, 35% protein. 5% carbs.

I basically eat a lot of healthy oil. I get to cook in animal fat for instance. The possibilities are endless... And well my frame is gaining muscle and the body fat is reducing.

Of course my goal may be different then yours...
10% and below body fat. Make sure you cosider what outcome you want to accomplish. If its just pure body weight loss go for the macronutrient ratio you set. Otherwise look into a ratio that focuses on fat and healthy oils from grassfed animals.

I have two words for most of this comment: Bro Science.

But there's pictures!

@OP finding the macros that work for you is good, it is glad to hear you're not hungry between meals, that's something I struggle with - low carb meal or not. Low carb isn't absolutely necessary to lose weight, some people like it and feel better for it and for others there's no difference. Just keep that calorie deficit up!

jessiethe3rd

synacious wrote: »

I have two words for most of this comment: Bro Science.

Here let me make a bit more... Fair and balanced...

It's a sweet science!! *smirk*

(I know... Man on top, woman on bottom... Sexist stereotypes!!)

Maxematics

jessiethe3rd wrote: »

synacious wrote: »

I have two words for most of this comment: Bro Science.

Here let me make a bit more... Fair and balanced...

It's a sweet science!! *smirk*

(I know... Man on top, woman on bottom... Sexist stereotypes!!)

Nah, nice try though. It's bro science because what you're saying is bunk. It's a fallacy. Before I even get to the carb crap, how can you tell you're gaining muscle and losing fat at the same time?