Macros vs calories, which do you like better

Options
briislovely
briislovely Posts: 92 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
Macros vs Calorie counting, which have worked best for you or do you like better??

Replies

  • sunnybeaches105
    sunnybeaches105 Posts: 2,831 Member
    Options
    If you're counting macros then you're counting calories. Calories matter for weight gain and loss. Macros matter for body composition and overall health. It's also helpful if you pay attention to your micros.
  • briislovely
    briislovely Posts: 92 Member
    Options
    Yea I get that. But I mean as far as you hitting macro goals not just calorie goals.
  • sunnybeaches105
    sunnybeaches105 Posts: 2,831 Member
    Options
    I'm not sure I'm following your question. Each macronutrient has a set amount of calories per gram so if you are counting those macronutrients then you are also counting calories. The long and short is if you care about losing/maintaining/gaining weight (whatever goal you have) AND you care about body composition and health THEN do both.

    What am I missing?

    Are you asking what your macro goals SHOULD be? If so, what are your goals?
  • Christine_72
    Christine_72 Posts: 16,049 Member
    edited July 2016
    Options
    Calorie counting is easier for me, i struggle to get my macros perfect most days. In the end i watch both calories and macros, if i had to choose then i'd say calories are more important to me, counting one means counting the other by default.
  • devil_in_a_blue_dress
    devil_in_a_blue_dress Posts: 5,214 Member
    edited July 2016
    Options
    I am sure you will find plenty of people who just pay attention to calories. But as sunnybeaches said, counting macros is counting calories. Really for most people I think it depends on where they are in the process. I feel like people who are far enough along realize it's not just weight loss also health and composition pay attention to macros as well.
  • briislovely
    briislovely Posts: 92 Member
    Options
    Sorry, I'll clarify. Im talking about hitting set macro goals vs just looking at calories. Say 30% fat, 30 % protein and 40% carb vs just eating whatever macros you want and still hitting the same calorie goal. Hopefully that makes sense.
  • sunnybeaches105
    sunnybeaches105 Posts: 2,831 Member
    edited July 2016
    Options
    briislovely wrote: »
    Sorry, I'll clarify. Im talking about hitting set macro goals vs just looking at calories. Say 30% fat, 30 % protein and 40% carb vs just eating whatever macros you want and still hitting the same calorie goal. Hopefully that makes sense.

    Prioritize calories first, but pay attention to your macros. Also, keep in mind that the percentages for macros is an easy shorthand that MFP uses and it doesn't necessarily reflect how macros should really be counted. For example, most people would do well to get AT LEAST 0.35 grams of fat per pound of overall body weight. That means a 200 pound person should get at least 70 grams of fat per day. IF that person has a goal of 2500 calories then they should set their macros so that at least 630 of those calories (9 calories per gram of fat x 70 = 630) are for fat, so 630/2500 = 25%. If that person then exercises and, let's say, burns an additional 500 calories, then MFP will give them 3000 calories for the day, and if they set their fat macro at 25% then 25% of those calories will be adjusted for their fat macro, so 750 calories or approximately 83 grams. It's not necessary for that person to get 83 grams of fat, but it's okay if they do.

    ETA: apologies for the math, but I want to illustrate that using the percentages will change things if you use MFP because it adds exercise calories. Rather than filling those extra calories with the same percentages of macros you can pretty much eat whatever you want, i.e. carbs because your basic nutrition should have been taken care of by your baseline calories (at least if your calorie goal isn't set too low or you're not so small so as to have a low calorie goal that makes it difficult to get adequate nutrition within that goal).
  • vixtris
    vixtris Posts: 688 Member
    Options
    for weight loss: calories, for performance: macros
  • KateTii
    KateTii Posts: 886 Member
    Options
    When I first started, I tried hitting my macros perfectly every day and I was miserable. I've always naturally had a high-carb, low fat and medium protein diet. Trying to force myself to change that was not much fun. I now just focus on calories and eating a fairly balanced diet.

    I am looking to build muscle soon and will probably have to put more effort into macros, but as someone who was just starting, focusing on calories alone was more sustainable.
  • CoachJen71
    CoachJen71 Posts: 1,200 Member
    Options
    I aim to hit calories first, then protein. Everything else just sort of falls where it may.
  • errollmaclean
    errollmaclean Posts: 562 Member
    Options
    Similar to sunnybeaches, I go with macros by gram for protein, fat and fiber as minimum daily goals. Letting the rest of the calories go to carbs or extra protein/fat. Since mfp uses % unless you pay for premium, you just have to adjust the % until it's as close as possible to the grams you want.
  • Lovestoscrapbook
    Lovestoscrapbook Posts: 295 Member
    Options
    Macros works for me better - it makes me more aware of the nutritional content of specific foods and their "value" in terms of using calories for that day. If I'm going to "spend" my calories, I want it to be something that will bring me in close to my protein, fiber and calcium macros and ideally below the fat macro maximum each day.

Categories