the lesser and the greater of the two evils . . .

Being over on sugar can be problem, but it largely depends on the source of the sugar. If it is sugar from natural sources such as fruit and milk, that's generally ok. It may be more helpful to you to focus on carbs and fiber, as they can give you a more complete picture.

As for protein, MFP's default is on the low end of what is considered appropriate for the average person. So being over on it is fine, and if you're active, it may actually be preferable to increase it (assuming you have no medical conditions that require a lower protein diet, like kidney disease or gout.)

Sodium can be kept down if you focus on non-processed, fresh foods you cook at home.

In general, try to MEET your cal goals. Along the way, watch your macros/micros and experiment to find the foods that fit your needs. It may help to browse other's diaries for ideas on how to improve your food choices. It is a learning process and most days won't be perfect. Just keep working at it and it will get there. :flowerforyou:

I'd say avoid starvation mode - that will mess with your metabolism and possibly derail your weight loss. Keep in mind that not all foods have those microonutrients listed. I noticed things that I know to be rich in potassium gave me zero milligrams. So don't depend completely on the MFP database.

Protein is not so bad to go over on, I am every day. But i too would see I had plenty of calories left but when i looked at my sugar it was horrible! I cut down a lot on sugar and it has seem to help. Remember to eat fruits, veggies, chicken, nuts and not processed food like mac and cheese from the box ( I was addicted to these:). Good luck!

NO. Your protein should in fact, be higher. Try 50% carbs 25% protein 25% fat. You need more protein to help build new muscles, keep you full. Definitely watch your sodium. The more clean, NATURAL foods you eat, the closer you will be to your sodium goal. Try to avoid processed foods, things drenched in vinegar, syrups and sauces.

Being over on sugar can be problem, but it largely depends on the source of the sugar. If it is sugar from natural sources such as fruit and milk, that's generally ok. It may be more helpful to you to focus on carbs and fiber, as they can give you a more complete picture.

As for protein, MFP's default is on the low end of what is considered appropriate for the average person. So being over on it is fine, and if you're active, it may actually be preferable to increase it (assuming you have no medical conditions that require a lower protein diet, like kidney disease or gout.)

Sodium can be kept down if you focus on non-processed, fresh foods you cook at home.

In general, try to MEET your cal goals. Along the way, watch your macros/micros and experiment to find the foods that fit your needs. It may help to browse other's diaries for ideas on how to improve your food choices. It is a learning process and most days won't be perfect. Just keep working at it and it will get there. :flowerforyou:

thank you for this! i'm still going to watch my protein and sugar but i feel a little better about being in the negative, at least in the negative when it comes to protein. i'm just trying to take it day by day, and i'm learning so much from you guys.

Quite welcome. Congrats on getting started - stay strong and you'll reach your goals!

NO. Your protein should in fact, be higher. Try 50% carbs 25% protein 25% fat. You need more protein to help build new muscles, keep you full. Definitely watch your sodium. The more clean, NATURAL foods you eat, the closer you will be to your sodium goal. Try to avoid processed foods, things drenched in vinegar, syrups and sauces.

i think that the broccoli that i eat has the most sodium because it's frozen, and it comes with a sauce of cheese. but surprisingly, my sodium has been pretty good! it's just that sugar that i'm worried about. but by 25% protein, is that like the whole 1g of protein per 1 lb of your weight ( i'm not exactly sure if that's how it goes, but i think that's pretty close. )?

Actually, the 1g per lb of lean body mass is generally used by serious athletes and body builders...it's really not necessary for the average person, and just makes things harder on your organs (kidneys, etc). For those who NEED it for maintaining a high level of muscle mass, it's fine. But if you don't have the muscle mass, your body can't use it and it will be flushed...and flushing it puts more stress on those organs.

Anyway, typically the recommendation for most people (without medical issues) is 15-35% protein (more like .4 - .9 g per lb lean body mass if I recall correctly). You can go to Goals, Change Goals, Custom and set your own percentages there, if you like. I personally like 25/25/50 as well. Doesn't make me crazy and leaves me room for a moderate diet.

The usual recommended breakdown is:
15-35% protein
12-25% fat
40-60% carbs (mostly complex)

So within those ranges, you just need to find what suits your body and your lifestyle, IMO.

lots of people adjust.i adjust.

there are recommended intakes on government websites if you want to feel better about it. try the nutrition.gov site..

also, there is no such thing as starvation mode. do some research, and not from sites like this since its very biased and supportive of diet myths. try the journal of nutrition or other medical or university sites. i've done it, and i can tell you, there is NO scientific proof or reputable studies to support this myth.

And, btw for anyone interested...here are respected, peer-reviewed medical studies that prove that starvation mode is not a myth, it is a medical fact.

Here is a short list. There are many others, but this is a good start if you're interested in studies regarding lowered metabolism and loss of lean mass, in the case of LCD/VLCD. And just a note, these are largely representative of obese individuals, the consequences in those near/at a healthy BMI are far more severe.

http://www.ajcn.org/content/53/4/826.full.pdf+html
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2613433?dopt=Abstract
http://www.ajcn.org/content/49/1/93.full.pdf+html
http://www.ajcn.org/content/45/2/391.full.pdf+html
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=6694559&dopt=AbstractPlus
http://www.ajcn.org/content/57/2/127.full.pdf
http://www.ajcn.org/content/51/2/167.abstract?ck=nck
http://www.nature.com/ijo/journal/v32/n3/abs/0803720a.html
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0887/is_n7-8_v15/ai_18602507/
http://www.amazon.com/Biology-Human-Starvation-I/dp/0816672342/ref=pd_sim_b_3
http://www.amazon.com/Biology-Human-Starvation-II/dp/0816672334/ref=pd_sim_b_2

Edited for typo

So I read through the first 3 and they are talking about verylowcalorie diets/modified fasts which is very specific and resulting in an extreme rapid weight loss. We're talking under 300cal a day for 3months or so, and in the 3rd one they only tested up to 8weeks after the fast which show a slight increase in RMR but not yet significant. These are studies testing a specific results and prove that RMR is effected by fasting/VLCD and nothing else. It's not proving that if you eat 200cal under what you're told you're gonna go into 'starvation mode' and doesn't take into account lifestyle or type of diet, etc. It's specific.

I not saying there's nothing to eating too little calories, just people don't have to fret about 'starving' if they eat less than the number they're told to eat for a few days. If anything, staggering your daily calorie consumption to increase and decrease each week can help weight loss in many cases. I think what irks people is the use of the word 'starvation' or 'starvation mode', trust me you're not going into starvation mode, and actual 'starvation' is after you have used up all your fat stores, so the term is inappropriate.

I also have to add, I don't think person that posted previously can really be said to be attacking the site or it's creators, seems a little snarky, you have to use common sense here. She's saying to do your own research because there is plenty of recent research that is turning the tides of opinion on previous encourage diet advice and different things may work for you. This site is helpful no matter what because it provides you with tools that will always be helpful: it makes you accountable for what you're eating, forces you to be aware of your calorie intake and encourages exercise and most importantly, provides support and companions aiming for the same goal.

You're welcome to your opinion, of course, but personally I find all of these studies relevant to any discussion on underfeeding and its effects. While the diets are specific and quite below what the majority of people here are going to encounter, if anything that emphasizes how dangerous it is for A) someone not on a tailored diet, as they are almost guaranteed to be missing essential nutrients someone who is not obese/morbidly obese, as their body cannot withstand the same kind of energy deficit. At any rate, I would highly recommend reading all of them, as several compare the use of VLCDs and LCDs and show a significant difference between the two (meaning VLCDs are problematic in decrease of RMR).

However, all that said, who said starvation mode happened when someone underate for a couple of days? I certainly didn't. I was simply providing research to refute a statement that "starvation mode is a myth" and that had nothing to do with the OP. If you'd like to see my conclusions on starvation mode (where I specifically state that it does NOT happen after eating 200 under for a few days.) While you may not be aware of it, being new, this is a common debate on the forums and there are frequently people who actively encourage others to undereat by shouting "it's a myth!!!!! don't eat!!!!". MFP is designed the way it is for a reason - to assist people with healthy, safe weight loss (or whatever their goal might be). And the site creators promote a philosophy that goes hand in hand with that - and that philosophy includes avoiding starvation mode. Whether the term is "inappropriate" is a matter of opinion, but since it is commonly used terminology (in the medical field as well - and is very different from starvation - no one said the two are interchangeable), it is what is used.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/230930-starvation-mode-how-it-works

As for being snarky, I don't believe I was (and that certainly wasn't my intent). I was simply informing someone that those kind of statements can get someone into trouble. Saying MFP is "biased and supportive of diet myths" IS inappropriate. (I'm a moderator on this forum and I'm pretty well aware of what does and does not constitute an attack - but because I had already posted on this thread, I wanted to avoid the appearance of impropriety and declined to moderate the thread - so I was simply providing some info.)

Anyway, good luck to you.