Lets Just Clear Up The Numbers...
collegefbfan
Posts: 346 Member
So, I am pretty used to this WOE and having a great time with it. Just waiting for my doctor's appointment in November. Just wanted to clear some things up with the numbers. I remember reading where a poster on here said that the percentages and macros aren't the thing to go crazy about. Just keep your fat double your protein and eat when you are hungry.
So, if we are talking about fat being double the protein, are we talking in percentages like the pie chart on the MFP app, or are we talking the grams for fats and protein?
Thanks again peeps.
So, if we are talking about fat being double the protein, are we talking in percentages like the pie chart on the MFP app, or are we talking the grams for fats and protein?
Thanks again peeps.
0
Replies
-
It would technically be both. If you are eating 60 g of protein try to eat 120 g of fat or more and carbs at a minimum. When you look at the MFP chart of daily breakdown of grams (not of calories), the fat portion will be double than the protein portion.0
-
I will always be of the thought that calories matter in weight loss. If your goal is only to keep fats double protein, you could easily be over on calories. By % of calories my fats are set to 75% which equals 121 grams. My protein is set at 20 % which is 73 grams. If I chose to eat another 25 grams of fat to have my fats double protein that would be 25x9=225 calories which is nearly a couple hundred calories over the 18×4=60 calories I get for the remaining grams of carbs at 5%.
I realize if I started from lower number like 50 grams of proteins thus 100 grams of fat my overall calorie intake would be lower. 50×4+100x9=1100 so not over on calories. However I can't help but think there might be a person or two out there who might then think they could fill the deficit with carbs.
I guess I just don't see the sense in this 2x thing. Unless you have all foods you eat memorized, you're tracking to see the numbers so why not just use the numbers MFP provides based on the (correct) data entered. The 2x fat to protein may work if you have your proteins at a higher percentage for some reason but I still don't get the effort.
Maybe on a day when you're challenged to "just be close"? I guess that might make some sense. For ketosis, it is better to error on the side of higher fat. I' m not disagreeing with any of the above. I'm just seeing it as confusing some others who are trying to learn the basics. Y'all may know the scenario: "I keep my fats 2x my protein. That was suggested. Why am I not losing weight". Or "Why is my stick not showing I'm in ketosis".
9 (for fats) is close to 2 times 4 (for proteins) so yes but no.2 -
I've never heard of fat being double the protein. I agree with kpk54. Calories are still going to matter for me too.1
-
-
baconslave wrote: »
And really, I kinda/sorta see the value in this regarding weight loss-"the fill the rest in with fats" part but can't that potentially throw the ketosis ratios out of kilter? What if someone ate only their proteins and carbs one day and barely ate any fat because they weren't hungry? Couldn't that potentially throw someone out of ketosis because both the protein and the carbs are converted to glucose and burned 1st? Even though they ate only to their recommended amount of carbs and protein then attempt to rely on the "personal excess adipose (fat) is your personal fat pantry" theory. Does this body fat "burn off" really keep one as appropriately fed for ketosis (based on ratios) as fat from food?
I'm really curious. I eat to calorie maintenance goal (Therapeutic Ketosis?? for a neurological disorder) which I realize has a different goal than weight loss. I tend to not rely on my "fat stores" on days I'm not hungry though at maintenance I do have a bit of excess fat. I'll eat some butter or coconut oil, not so much to bring my calories up but rather to improve the fat to protein/carb ratio. I'll enter my dinner in my food diary and then focus on eating primarily FAT as needed through the rest of the day to get the ratio f/c-p ratio where I want/need it. Dinner is usually only a meat and a vegetable (so a big hit of protein and and most of my carbs). I don't mind being under calorie a bit if not hungry. I do mind not getting enough fat to keep the ratios as desired.
Hope that makes sense and encourages dialogue. I think I am missing something regarding ketosis and whether or not body fat compares 1:1 with fat from food.
0 -
baconslave wrote: »
This sounds right. I wouldn't do any doubling of anything but then again I follow Keto (~20g) and not low carb (anywhere from 0- 150 IIRC). If you're following Keto you almost have to keep track of everything you eat, which means watching macros closely unless you're eating the same thing day in and day out and already know what the values are. So it depends on how strict you are with your carbs I guess.0 -
I always make sure that when I am putting something in my mouth it has some kind of fat in it. My coffee? It's either a BPC or regular with hwc. Foods I'm cooking have fat added to them, either bacon grease which lives in a happy container next to the stove top or butter.
My focus has always been to
keep carbs as low as I can first.
Lower end of my protein range for meals
Then fats are again added to every meal.
So far this has been key for me.
1 -
Thanks @ProCoffeenator. That helps. Add fat here and there to whatever. But @bowlerae my chart shows 75% fat and 21% protein. Three times as much fat as protein. But in grams I have 115 fat and 72 protein. That ain't even double the protein.0
-
collegefbfan wrote: »Thanks @ProCoffeenator. That helps. Add fat here and there to whatever. But @bowlerae my chart shows 75% fat and 21% protein. Three times as much fat as protein. But in grams I have 115 fat and 72 protein. That ain't even double the protein.
Because on MFP the pie chart is done as % of your total intake.
A gram of protein is 4 calories, whereas a gram of fat is 9 calories.
That is why your fat % is higher (because it is a higher percentage of your total calorie intake) but still not double the protein grams.4 -
Oh got ya. Figures.0
-
I just want to add that my mom had her blood work done and she got her results back after 5 weeks of this WOE. The blood panel tests show the past 12 weeks and my mom's triglycerides are way done, LDL is way down, HDL went down 2 points, but that is to be expected when your LDL goes so far down, and blood sugar is in normal range and she is no longer prediabetic! This is from only 5 weeks in with a 5lbs weight loss from the last blood test. She had actually lost almost 17lbs as of today after 6 weeks of this WOE after a gain during the spring and summer. I am wholeheartedly convinced this is the way to go! I can't wait until the OP gets their results back! It's going to be great!!!10
-
I've heard the double the fat thing but it doesn't make sense to me. If the point is to heal your body or lose weight then the calories have to matter in some way. Just as an example - 50g of protein 100g of fat and 20g or less of carbs is only going to come out to be about 1100 calories. I just can't buy into the idea that those numbers are good for me, the woman that's 6in. shorter and 30lbs lighter, the one that's 6in taller and 30lbs heavier, and the one that is exactly my height and weight but has a far better BMI. It just doesn't make sense. I think we have to know what calories we need to keep ourselves healthy and how low we can take them to lose pounds.
My macros were done for me by someone I know very well. I know that she spent a great deal of time researching this WOE then testing it on herself all on behalf of a family member with numerous health issues that wanted to try it. Since I got that "easy way out", I don't have her research so I can't argue the science behind any of it. She gave me macros and a calorie limit - Protein macro is a GOAL, Fat macro, Carb macro, and Calories are LIMITS. The percentage of calories from each macro is set at 70F/25P/5C. As long as I'm close to hitting my macros, my calories will not be so deficient or high that it becomes dangerous but I almost never hit my calorie limit.0 -
805_blondie wrote: »I just want to add that my mom had her blood work done and she got her results back after 5 weeks of this WOE. The blood panel tests show the past 12 weeks and my mom's triglycerides are way done, LDL is way down, HDL went down 2 points, but that is to be expected when your LDL goes so far down, and blood sugar is in normal range and she is no longer prediabetic! This is from only 5 weeks in with a 5lbs weight loss from the last blood test. She had actually lost almost 17lbs as of today after 6 weeks of this WOE after a gain during the spring and summer. I am wholeheartedly convinced this is the way to go! I can't wait until the OP gets their results back! It's going to be great!!!
That's great news @805_blondie!! So happy for your mom's awesome results!0 -
Well took my son to doctor today. My doctor. Son has strep, go figure. But I told her about my weight loss and that I was doing keto. She said see you in November to run those labs/panels.
Can't wait. I hope I impress her with some good numbers.2 -
baconslave wrote: »
And really, I kinda/sorta see the value in this regarding weight loss-"the fill the rest in with fats" part but can't that potentially throw the ketosis ratios out of kilter? What if someone ate only their proteins and carbs one day and barely ate any fat because they weren't hungry? Couldn't that potentially throw someone out of ketosis because both the protein and the carbs are converted to glucose and burned 1st? Even though they ate only to their recommended amount of carbs and protein then attempt to rely on the "personal excess adipose (fat) is your personal fat pantry" theory. Does this body fat "burn off" really keep one as appropriately fed for ketosis (based on ratios) as fat from food?
I'm really curious. I eat to calorie maintenance goal (Therapeutic Ketosis?? for a neurological disorder) which I realize has a different goal than weight loss. I tend to not rely on my "fat stores" on days I'm not hungry though at maintenance I do have a bit of excess fat. I'll eat some butter or coconut oil, not so much to bring my calories up but rather to improve the fat to protein/carb ratio. I'll enter my dinner in my food diary and then focus on eating primarily FAT as needed through the rest of the day to get the ratio f/c-p ratio where I want/need it. Dinner is usually only a meat and a vegetable (so a big hit of protein and and most of my carbs). I don't mind being under calorie a bit if not hungry. I do mind not getting enough fat to keep the ratios as desired.
Hope that makes sense and encourages dialogue. I think I am missing something regarding ketosis and whether or not body fat compares 1:1 with fat from food.baconslave wrote: »
And really, I kinda/sorta see the value in this regarding weight loss-"the fill the rest in with fats" part but can't that potentially throw the ketosis ratios out of kilter? What if someone ate only their proteins and carbs one day and barely ate any fat because they weren't hungry? Couldn't that potentially throw someone out of ketosis because both the protein and the carbs are converted to glucose and burned 1st? Even though they ate only to their recommended amount of carbs and protein then attempt to rely on the "personal excess adipose (fat) is your personal fat pantry" theory. Does this body fat "burn off" really keep one as appropriately fed for ketosis (based on ratios) as fat from food?
I'm really curious. I eat to calorie maintenance goal (Therapeutic Ketosis?? for a neurological disorder) which I realize has a different goal than weight loss. I tend to not rely on my "fat stores" on days I'm not hungry though at maintenance I do have a bit of excess fat. I'll eat some butter or coconut oil, not so much to bring my calories up but rather to improve the fat to protein/carb ratio. I'll enter my dinner in my food diary and then focus on eating primarily FAT as needed through the rest of the day to get the ratio f/c-p ratio where I want/need it. Dinner is usually only a meat and a vegetable (so a big hit of protein and and most of my carbs). I don't mind being under calorie a bit if not hungry. I do mind not getting enough fat to keep the ratios as desired.
Hope that makes sense and encourages dialogue. I think I am missing something regarding ketosis and whether or not body fat compares 1:1 with fat from food.
You aren't exactly. Keto is often a range. But your end of the range is more strict on macros because neurological issues require a more specific and consistent adherence to achieve a specific result. Non-neuro/non-medical keto, is a wider range. Following the formula above, which is what I did, usually kept my fat macro between 63 and 65% (with carbs at 5%). And fat was always higher than protein in grams without me trying.
It's important for those trying to lose weight to keep my last point in mind. If your fat is not just high (good) but too high (not good) then you won't be able to lose weight because of excess calorie consumption. And this is mainly important for people who aren't logging (or are only loosely logging) calories. And is also a comfort for those who keep thinking they have to pile the fat to up their calories when they just aren't hungry. The fat macros are more of a guide for those on a non-descript, non-medical keto diet. It gives them a ceiling to reach IF they aren't feeling satisfied or well, but it's also a ceiling to stop them if they are like me and don't achieve appetite suppression like some others have. You can't just eat ALL THE FAT. And we have to tell people that. Some people do get confused, overeat fat (which raises calories too much) keeping them from losing or causing them to gain.
I'm not going to pretend to be an expert on the science involved. Perhaps those who are more in the know on that aspect can chime in. In my understanding, Phinney and Volek had a graphic explaining the optimal ratio between using body fat vs. dietary fat.
Is this accurate? Is this the way it really works? They say that eating too much fat will hamper your body from delving into burning body fat stores if dietary fat is too readily available. But the body is always storing fat AND burning fat. This is what the experts give us to go by, is all I can say.
2 -
Thanks for that @baconslave . I found this explanation of the chart. chart starts about 3:45 in the Phinney video. As a side note, I liked his idea of blending butter and olive oil and forming it into a stick and refrigerating for easy use like "oleo".
https://optimisingnutrition.com/2015/06/26/what-is-a-well-formulated-ketogenic-diet/1 -
805_blondie wrote: »I just want to add that my mom had her blood work done and she got her results back after 5 weeks of this WOE. The blood panel tests show the past 12 weeks and my mom's triglycerides are way done, LDL is way down, HDL went down 2 points, but that is to be expected when your LDL goes so far down, and blood sugar is in normal range and she is no longer prediabetic! This is from only 5 weeks in with a 5lbs weight loss from the last blood test. She had actually lost almost 17lbs as of today after 6 weeks of this WOE after a gain during the spring and summer. I am wholeheartedly convinced this is the way to go! I can't wait until the OP gets their results back! It's going to be great!!!
A big congrats to your mom @805_blondie!1 -
The amount of protein seems to be a widely debated topic in the LCHF/Keto world. All the research I have been able to find says we lose and need to replace about 0.6 g per kg of body weight per day, and those studies seem to recommend eating 0.8 g per kg of body weight per day. These are for the "typical" American - whatever that means. I took it to mean the person who does little to no regular exercise. They do specify if you are attempting to build muscle, you need more.
For some one who is 176 lbs, the 0.8g number would = 64g of protein a day. To me, that is not much.
The OKL chart pushes up the recommended minimum protein to about 2 times this.
It is possible for your body to convert excess dietary protein into glucose. According to Dr Jason Fung, this is more likely with animal protein than plant protein. My thought based on his bar graphs on this is that is about even since you can eat animal protein without getting any carbs, but unless it is some kind of processed product, you can't eat plant protein without adding carbs to your diet.
Just because your body CAN convert excess dietary protein into glucose also does not mean that is what will happen. From everything I can find, this seems to be an excellent example of YMMV. Personally, I have found when I go WAY overboard on my protein for a day, my BG readings do go up, even if I have carbs in single digits. By way over, I am talking about 200+ g in a day vs the 66 g (at the 0.8 recommendation). It does NOT go up as much as if I had gone over on carbs.
You mentioned before you are not diabetic, so that last point may not be as important other than the fact that conversion to glucose, if done at a significant enough level, can slow down progression into ketosis if that is your goal. There are a couple of studies that show this delay when the amounts of protein in the diet are significantly higher.3 -
collegefbfan wrote: »Well took my son to doctor today. My doctor. Son has strep, go figure. But I told her about my weight loss and that I was doing keto. She said see you in November to run those labs/panels.
Can't wait. I hope I impress her with some good numbers.
This is the best website I found to determine what your caloric and macro goals should be while eating keto. For LCHF, you can increase carbs and protein based on your own personal preferences of how much you eat. You said your daily caloric limit is 1100. These is too low for anyone. No one should be under 1200 unless it is medically supervised.0 -
It would technically be both. If you are eating 60 g of protein try to eat 120 g of fat or more and carbs at a minimum. When you look at the MFP chart of daily breakdown of grams (not of calories), the fat portion will be double than the protein portion.
Nope.
If you double the quantity of fat, you roughly quadruple the calories from fat. Fat is about twice as calorie dense as protein.0 -
@bowlerae Do I have that listed somewhere where I said my calories are 1100? If so, that is a mistake on my part. I eat 1600 a day or about there. Please let me know where I have that so I can change it.
Thanks0 -
It was @Brigit723 who said 1100 calories above.0
This discussion has been closed.