Show me yours and I'll show you mine....(MACROS that is....)
idaevon
Posts: 19 Member
For those who track macros, what are your splits?
I switched mine to 45/35/20 (protein/fat/carbs) and within a week and a half saw my body change (finally!). Only lost one pound but composition is for sure changing to the leaner look I like.
What are your numbers? I feel like I will slowly increase the carb portion after about a month. I am realizing my body just doesn't maintain the lean look with too many carbs. Going to goldilocks it until I find the "just right" combo. Have any of you tried this? Is 20-25% carbs sustainable?
(PS - I do workout 4-6 days per week. Moderate to intense, 45min to an hour. Do things like hot yoga, kettlebells, circuit training, boxing......and my energy has been fine so far.)
I switched mine to 45/35/20 (protein/fat/carbs) and within a week and a half saw my body change (finally!). Only lost one pound but composition is for sure changing to the leaner look I like.
What are your numbers? I feel like I will slowly increase the carb portion after about a month. I am realizing my body just doesn't maintain the lean look with too many carbs. Going to goldilocks it until I find the "just right" combo. Have any of you tried this? Is 20-25% carbs sustainable?
(PS - I do workout 4-6 days per week. Moderate to intense, 45min to an hour. Do things like hot yoga, kettlebells, circuit training, boxing......and my energy has been fine so far.)
0
Replies
-
I think percentages are a sub-ideal way to look at macros, if one really wants to focus on nutrition. I strive for:
* 0.6-0.8g protein minimum daily per pound of healthy goal weight (as a rough approximation of 0.8-1g per pound of lean body mass)
* 0.35-0.45g fats minimum daily per pound of healthy goal weight, putting priority on MUFAs/PUFAs and getting enough Omega-3s.
More than that of either is fine, within calorie goal, and I let carbs Fall where the may to balance. (Looking back, t ran around 150g carbs daily while losing, 200g+ most of the time in 4+ years maintenance since.)
I set my MFP percentages around that at base calories, but ignore them really. If my macro totals are a mix or red and green, I just pretend it's Christmas. In maintenance, I rounded up to easy-to-remember minimums of 100g protein, 50g fat, and get those daily.
It's an that I think it's also important for me to eat a bare minimum of five 80g servings of varied, colorful veggies/fruits daily for fiber and micros, and prefer to get 10+ when I can. I have a fiber minimum of 25g, but rarely need to think of it, as it's unusual to fall below 35-40g.
4 -
I don't go by % is not as accurate since calorie intakes vary significantly, so 35% of 1500 vs 3500 calories will look quite different.
I have muscle building/retention goals so I usually aim for minimum:
Protein: 0.8 to 1g
Fats: 0.35 to 0.6g
Carbs: The rest
As for my actual numbers I don't track but roughly when in deficit 130-160g protein (my weight range is 130-145lbs), 65-100g fat, 150-250g carbs.
3 -
I have been slowly reducing my calories over the last several months. I takes a fair amount of time to learn how to eat cleaner to even obtain a lower caloric intake and get the numbers I am looking for.
I have been at 1800 cals for a couple weeks now. I try to get 150g protein, and stay around 100g Carbs (less than 70g of sugar) and fill in the rest with fats.
On my heavy cardio days I tend to eat a little more cals and go over on the carbs about 50-70g.
Finally started to lose weight with 1800 cal and 4 days in the gym. Sugar was a big cut for me. Sugar holds more water in the body/muscles. Since my carbs are low and I don’t have that extra water, I notice I have to drink a lot more water or my lips start to crack quickly.
I don’t mind the lower carb intake, but it takes some meal prepping so I can incorporate a serving of Thin Mints into the weekly routine...love those high cardio/carb days!0 -
I think percentages are a sub-ideal way to look at macros, if one really wants to focus on nutrition. I strive for:
* 0.6-0.8g protein minimum daily per pound of healthy goal weight (as a rough approximation of 0.8-1g per pound of lean body mass)
* 0.35-0.45g fats minimum daily per pound of healthy goal weight, putting priority on MUFAs/PUFAs and getting enough Omega-3s.
More than that of either is fine, within calorie goal, and I let carbs Fall where the may to balance. (Looking back, t ran around 150g carbs daily while losing, 200g+ most of the time in 4+ years maintenance since.)
I set my MFP percentages around that at base calories, but ignore them really. If my macro totals are a mix or red and green, I just pretend it's Christmas. In maintenance, I rounded up to easy-to-remember minimums of 100g protein, 50g fat, and get those daily.
It's an that I think it's also important for me to eat a bare minimum of five 80g servings of varied, colorful veggies/fruits daily for fiber and micros, and prefer to get 10+ when I can. I have a fiber minimum of 25g, but rarely need to think of it, as it's unusual to fall below 35-40g.
This is my approach too.0 -
I don't go by % is not as accurate since calorie intakes vary significantly, so 35% of 1500 vs 3500 calories will look quite different.
I have muscle building/retention goals so I usually aim for minimum:
Protein: 0.8 to 1g
Fats: 0.35 to 0.6g
Carbs: The rest
As for my actual numbers I don't track but roughly when in deficit 130-160g protein (my weight range is 130-145lbs), 65-100g fat, 150-250g carbs.
When you say "rest" what do you mean? As an example, if my goal weight is 125 (I'm currently at 138), and looking at your calculations, I'd be:
Protein: 100-125 grams (goal weight multiplied by .8 to 1)
Fats: 43-75 grams
Carbs: ?
Are you multiplying by goal weight or some other number?
I've never looked at it this way, so I'm trying to understand. Thanks
0 -
I'd imagine "the rest" = "the remaining calories."
For example, if I am aiming for 1600 cals and eat 100 g of protein (400 cal) and 50 g of fat (450 cal), I would have potentially 750 cals left for carbs (or 187-ish g).
It's the same as people mean when they say they have a minimum goal of X for protein and Y for fat and let carbs fall as they may. It's understood that this is within cals.3 -
The rest of your calories after protein and fats would be carbs. So in your case if you had 125g protein, 75g fat then it would be 500 cals (125g x 4 cals)+ 675 cals (75g x 9cals) = 1175 cals, so carbs would make up the rest. If for example your intake is 2000 that would be 825 cals left (so about 206g carbs since each gram is 4cals)
Keep in mind those are minimums so you can definitely increase protein and fat as you prefer if you don't want carbs that high.
Hope that makes sense and didn't confuse.1 -
The rest of your calories after protein and fats would be carbs. So in your case if you had 125g protein, 75g fat then it would be 500 cals (125g x 4 cals)+ 675 cals (75g x 9cals) = 1175 cals, so carbs would make up the rest. If for example your intake is 2000 that would be 825 cals left (so about 206g carbs since each gram is 4cals)
Keep in mind those are minimums so you can definitely increase protein and fat as you prefer if you don't want carbs that high.
Hope that makes sense and didn't confuse.
Got it! I thought it was calories, but wasn't positive. This helps.
Now, how do you determine caloric intake? I used TDEE, so right now my calories are roughy 1460 (and I'm no entirely sure that is a correct number either, but I used several TDEE calculators and they were roughly the same.0 -
I'd imagine "the rest" = "the remaining calories."
For example, if I am aiming for 1600 cals and eat 100 g of protein (400 cal) and 50 g of fat (450 cal), I would have potentially 750 cals left for carbs (or 187-ish g).
It's the same as people mean when they say they have a minimum goal of X for protein and Y for fat and let carbs fall as they may. It's understood that this is within cals.
That's what I thought but wasn't sure. I've not calculated this way, and figured there had to be a calorie goal in there somewhere!0 -
The rest of your calories after protein and fats would be carbs. So in your case if you had 125g protein, 75g fat then it would be 500 cals (125g x 4 cals)+ 675 cals (75g x 9cals) = 1175 cals, so carbs would make up the rest. If for example your intake is 2000 that would be 825 cals left (so about 206g carbs since each gram is 4cals)
Keep in mind those are minimums so you can definitely increase protein and fat as you prefer if you don't want carbs that high.
Hope that makes sense and didn't confuse.
So after using my 1460 cals; the carbs look like 71. Which is pretty close to what I'm doing now. I just have my protein higher and the fats lower. Interesting.....0 -
The rest of your calories after protein and fats would be carbs. So in your case if you had 125g protein, 75g fat then it would be 500 cals (125g x 4 cals)+ 675 cals (75g x 9cals) = 1175 cals, so carbs would make up the rest. If for example your intake is 2000 that would be 825 cals left (so about 206g carbs since each gram is 4cals)
Keep in mind those are minimums so you can definitely increase protein and fat as you prefer if you don't want carbs that high.
Hope that makes sense and didn't confuse.
So after using my 1460 cals; the carbs look like 71. Which is pretty close to what I'm doing now. I just have my protein higher and the fats lower. Interesting.....
The MFP defaults aren't crazy for most people, and things in that general region may be OK, too.
Depending on how low your fats go, that could be a potential problem. If you're eating high-ish fiber (my preference), getting fat too low is a pretty common cause of constipation (and we see that here, IMO, sometimes among people who try to cut fat really far because it's calorie dense, then turn around and eat a lot of highfiber veggies). Fat is also important for hormone balance (especially for women), and cellular health, among other things. Some people find fat satiating, also (I don't, personally).
I won't try to tell you what "super low" is, but I gave you my target ratios above and others have said similar things. If you're not very far off, you're probably fine. If you're consistently quite far under that recommendation on fat, you might want to sacrifice some carbs or protein to get a bit more in (nuts, seeds, avocados, olive oil, etc. - that sort of thing would be especially good).
If you're currently at 138 pounds, heading for 125, what deficit (percent or number of calories subtracted from TDEE) gets you to 1460, at your level of exercise? (I'm a sedentary li'l ol lady at a slightly lower weight than you, and I'd lose like a house afire at those calories, with your exercise activity level.)0 -
The rest of your calories after protein and fats would be carbs. So in your case if you had 125g protein, 75g fat then it would be 500 cals (125g x 4 cals)+ 675 cals (75g x 9cals) = 1175 cals, so carbs would make up the rest. If for example your intake is 2000 that would be 825 cals left (so about 206g carbs since each gram is 4cals)
Keep in mind those are minimums so you can definitely increase protein and fat as you prefer if you don't want carbs that high.
Hope that makes sense and didn't confuse.
So after using my 1460 cals; the carbs look like 71. Which is pretty close to what I'm doing now. I just have my protein higher and the fats lower. Interesting.....
The MFP defaults aren't crazy for most people, and things in that general region may be OK, too.
Depending on how low your fats go, that could be a potential problem. If you're eating high-ish fiber (my preference), getting fat too low is a pretty common cause of constipation (and we see that here, IMO, sometimes among people who try to cut fat really far because it's calorie dense, then turn around and eat a lot of highfiber veggies). Fat is also important for hormone balance (especially for women), and cellular health, among other things. Some people find fat satiating, also (I don't, personally).
I won't try to tell you what "super low" is, but I gave you my target ratios above and others have said similar things. If you're not very far off, you're probably fine. If you're consistently quite far under that recommendation on fat, you might want to sacrifice some carbs or protein to get a bit more in (nuts, seeds, avocados, olive oil, etc. - that sort of thing would be especially good).
If you're currently at 138 pounds, heading for 125, what deficit (percent or number of calories subtracted from TDEE) gets you to 1460, at your level of exercise? (I'm a sedentary li'l ol lady at a slightly lower weight than you, and I'd lose like a house afire at those calories, with your exercise activity level.)
OP said she was doing 35%, which isn't low fat at all (she said lower than using the 75 g number discussed above, not super low). My math comes out at about 57 g or .46 g/goal weight.0 -
For those who track macros, what are your splits?
I switched mine to 45/35/20 (protein/fat/carbs) and within a week and a half saw my body change (finally!). Only lost one pound but composition is for sure changing to the leaner look I like.
What are your numbers? I feel like I will slowly increase the carb portion after about a month. I am realizing my body just doesn't maintain the lean look with too many carbs. Going to goldilocks it until I find the "just right" combo. Have any of you tried this? Is 20-25% carbs sustainable?
(PS - I do workout 4-6 days per week. Moderate to intense, 45min to an hour. Do things like hot yoga, kettlebells, circuit training, boxing......and my energy has been fine so far.)
I am very close to this, generally I aim to stay within 40 protein 30 carb, 30 fat but find a higher fat then protein and less carbs works wonders. I dont go to extremes trying to be exact. I go by the quality of foods. Activity for day, exercise and how I am feeling. Going too low on carbs for me meant less vegetables like broccoli, cauliflower and other greens, cruciferous veggies. I also have says much higher in protein.
I am also primarily plant based except fish and hydrolyzed collagen powder.
Finding what works for you is what matters most 🙂0 -
The rest of your calories after protein and fats would be carbs. So in your case if you had 125g protein, 75g fat then it would be 500 cals (125g x 4 cals)+ 675 cals (75g x 9cals) = 1175 cals, so carbs would make up the rest. If for example your intake is 2000 that would be 825 cals left (so about 206g carbs since each gram is 4cals)
Keep in mind those are minimums so you can definitely increase protein and fat as you prefer if you don't want carbs that high.
Hope that makes sense and didn't confuse.
So after using my 1460 cals; the carbs look like 71. Which is pretty close to what I'm doing now. I just have my protein higher and the fats lower. Interesting.....
The MFP defaults aren't crazy for most people, and things in that general region may be OK, too.
Depending on how low your fats go, that could be a potential problem. If you're eating high-ish fiber (my preference), getting fat too low is a pretty common cause of constipation (and we see that here, IMO, sometimes among people who try to cut fat really far because it's calorie dense, then turn around and eat a lot of highfiber veggies). Fat is also important for hormone balance (especially for women), and cellular health, among other things. Some people find fat satiating, also (I don't, personally).
I won't try to tell you what "super low" is, but I gave you my target ratios above and others have said similar things. If you're not very far off, you're probably fine. If you're consistently quite far under that recommendation on fat, you might want to sacrifice some carbs or protein to get a bit more in (nuts, seeds, avocados, olive oil, etc. - that sort of thing would be especially good).
If you're currently at 138 pounds, heading for 125, what deficit (percent or number of calories subtracted from TDEE) gets you to 1460, at your level of exercise? (I'm a sedentary li'l ol lady at a slightly lower weight than you, and I'd lose like a house afire at those calories, with your exercise activity level.)
OP said she was doing 35%, which isn't low fat at all (she said lower than using the 75 g number discussed above, not super low). My math comes out at about 57 g or .46 g/goal weight.
Correct - 35%, which is 57 grams.
Using the cals of 1464; my splits using percentages is:
Protein: 165g (45%)
Fat: 57g (35%)
Carbs 73g (20%)
Using the math sardelsa gave (similar to you and Ann...):
Protein: 100-125 grams (goal weight multiplied by .8 to 1)
Fats: 43-75 grams
Carbs (rest): 71 grams
So my protein is more than the .8-1 multiplier, which then reduces the grams of fat.....
The two methods aren't too far apart it looks like.0 -
For those who track macros, what are your splits?
I switched mine to 45/35/20 (protein/fat/carbs) and within a week and a half saw my body change (finally!). Only lost one pound but composition is for sure changing to the leaner look I like.
What are your numbers? I feel like I will slowly increase the carb portion after about a month. I am realizing my body just doesn't maintain the lean look with too many carbs. Going to goldilocks it until I find the "just right" combo. Have any of you tried this? Is 20-25% carbs sustainable?
(PS - I do workout 4-6 days per week. Moderate to intense, 45min to an hour. Do things like hot yoga, kettlebells, circuit training, boxing......and my energy has been fine so far.)
I am very close to this, generally I aim to stay within 40 protein 30 carb, 30 fat but find a higher fat then protein and less carbs works wonders. I dont go to extremes trying to be exact. I go by the quality of foods. Activity for day, exercise and how I am feeling. Going too low on carbs for me meant less vegetables like broccoli, cauliflower and other greens, cruciferous veggies. I also have says much higher in protein.
I am also primarily plant based except fish and hydrolyzed collagen powder.
Finding what works for you is what matters most 🙂
I did the 40/30/30 and got impatient with no body change.....now, I only gave it like 3 weeks. But still.....haha. So I just tweaked the numbers to my 45/35/20....and within a week can see my abs starting to define again
My remaining question is calories......using the TDEE calculators it calculated my "lose weight" calories as 1460. I don't know how it calculated that.....1 -
The rest of your calories after protein and fats would be carbs. So in your case if you had 125g protein, 75g fat then it would be 500 cals (125g x 4 cals)+ 675 cals (75g x 9cals) = 1175 cals, so carbs would make up the rest. If for example your intake is 2000 that would be 825 cals left (so about 206g carbs since each gram is 4cals)
Keep in mind those are minimums so you can definitely increase protein and fat as you prefer if you don't want carbs that high.
Hope that makes sense and didn't confuse.
So after using my 1460 cals; the carbs look like 71. Which is pretty close to what I'm doing now. I just have my protein higher and the fats lower. Interesting.....
The MFP defaults aren't crazy for most people, and things in that general region may be OK, too.
Depending on how low your fats go, that could be a potential problem. If you're eating high-ish fiber (my preference), getting fat too low is a pretty common cause of constipation (and we see that here, IMO, sometimes among people who try to cut fat really far because it's calorie dense, then turn around and eat a lot of highfiber veggies). Fat is also important for hormone balance (especially for women), and cellular health, among other things. Some people find fat satiating, also (I don't, personally).
I won't try to tell you what "super low" is, but I gave you my target ratios above and others have said similar things. If you're not very far off, you're probably fine. If you're consistently quite far under that recommendation on fat, you might want to sacrifice some carbs or protein to get a bit more in (nuts, seeds, avocados, olive oil, etc. - that sort of thing would be especially good).
If you're currently at 138 pounds, heading for 125, what deficit (percent or number of calories subtracted from TDEE) gets you to 1460, at your level of exercise? (I'm a sedentary li'l ol lady at a slightly lower weight than you, and I'd lose like a house afire at those calories, with your exercise activity level.)
I don't know how it got to 1460....I just used the calculators and that's what the majority of them gave me as a "lose weight" (vs maintain weight) number......0 -
For those who track macros, what are your splits?
I switched mine to 45/35/20 (protein/fat/carbs) and within a week and a half saw my body change (finally!). Only lost one pound but composition is for sure changing to the leaner look I like.
What are your numbers? I feel like I will slowly increase the carb portion after about a month. I am realizing my body just doesn't maintain the lean look with too many carbs. Going to goldilocks it until I find the "just right" combo. Have any of you tried this? Is 20-25% carbs sustainable?
(PS - I do workout 4-6 days per week. Moderate to intense, 45min to an hour. Do things like hot yoga, kettlebells, circuit training, boxing......and my energy has been fine so far.)
I am very close to this, generally I aim to stay within 40 protein 30 carb, 30 fat but find a higher fat then protein and less carbs works wonders. I dont go to extremes trying to be exact. I go by the quality of foods. Activity for day, exercise and how I am feeling. Going too low on carbs for me meant less vegetables like broccoli, cauliflower and other greens, cruciferous veggies. I also have says much higher in protein.
I am also primarily plant based except fish and hydrolyzed collagen powder.
Finding what works for you is what matters most 🙂
I did the 40/30/30 and got impatient with no body change.....now, I only gave it like 3 weeks. But still.....haha. So I just tweaked the numbers to my 45/35/20....and within a week can see my abs starting to define again
My remaining question is calories......using the TDEE calculators it calculated my "lose weight" calories as 1460. I don't know how it calculated that.....
I may change mine to that too since it's generally in that range. 🙂0 -
Fair play to yous that's all over my head I wouldn't have a clue where to start. Talk to me about financial planning and I get it no problem but counting macros is like algerbra to me.0
-
The rest of your calories after protein and fats would be carbs. So in your case if you had 125g protein, 75g fat then it would be 500 cals (125g x 4 cals)+ 675 cals (75g x 9cals) = 1175 cals, so carbs would make up the rest. If for example your intake is 2000 that would be 825 cals left (so about 206g carbs since each gram is 4cals)
Keep in mind those are minimums so you can definitely increase protein and fat as you prefer if you don't want carbs that high.
Hope that makes sense and didn't confuse.
So after using my 1460 cals; the carbs look like 71. Which is pretty close to what I'm doing now. I just have my protein higher and the fats lower. Interesting.....
The MFP defaults aren't crazy for most people, and things in that general region may be OK, too.
Depending on how low your fats go, that could be a potential problem. If you're eating high-ish fiber (my preference), getting fat too low is a pretty common cause of constipation (and we see that here, IMO, sometimes among people who try to cut fat really far because it's calorie dense, then turn around and eat a lot of highfiber veggies). Fat is also important for hormone balance (especially for women), and cellular health, among other things. Some people find fat satiating, also (I don't, personally).
I won't try to tell you what "super low" is, but I gave you my target ratios above and others have said similar things. If you're not very far off, you're probably fine. If you're consistently quite far under that recommendation on fat, you might want to sacrifice some carbs or protein to get a bit more in (nuts, seeds, avocados, olive oil, etc. - that sort of thing would be especially good).
If you're currently at 138 pounds, heading for 125, what deficit (percent or number of calories subtracted from TDEE) gets you to 1460, at your level of exercise? (I'm a sedentary li'l ol lady at a slightly lower weight than you, and I'd lose like a house afire at those calories, with your exercise activity level.)
I don't know how it got to 1460....I just used the calculators and that's what the majority of them gave me as a "lose weight" (vs maintain weight) number......
What rate of loss did you select though? Because as Ann said, that seems low for the amount of activity you are doing. How tall are you?
Also, the reason for the change in body composition with lower carbs is a drop in water weight, as a result of lower glycogen (stored carbohydrate) levels in your muscles.2 -
70p/15f/15c0
-
Mine - I use a nutrition team to provide me mine0 -
The rest of your calories after protein and fats would be carbs. So in your case if you had 125g protein, 75g fat then it would be 500 cals (125g x 4 cals)+ 675 cals (75g x 9cals) = 1175 cals, so carbs would make up the rest. If for example your intake is 2000 that would be 825 cals left (so about 206g carbs since each gram is 4cals)
Keep in mind those are minimums so you can definitely increase protein and fat as you prefer if you don't want carbs that high.
Hope that makes sense and didn't confuse.
So after using my 1460 cals; the carbs look like 71. Which is pretty close to what I'm doing now. I just have my protein higher and the fats lower. Interesting.....
The MFP defaults aren't crazy for most people, and things in that general region may be OK, too.
Depending on how low your fats go, that could be a potential problem. If you're eating high-ish fiber (my preference), getting fat too low is a pretty common cause of constipation (and we see that here, IMO, sometimes among people who try to cut fat really far because it's calorie dense, then turn around and eat a lot of highfiber veggies). Fat is also important for hormone balance (especially for women), and cellular health, among other things. Some people find fat satiating, also (I don't, personally).
I won't try to tell you what "super low" is, but I gave you my target ratios above and others have said similar things. If you're not very far off, you're probably fine. If you're consistently quite far under that recommendation on fat, you might want to sacrifice some carbs or protein to get a bit more in (nuts, seeds, avocados, olive oil, etc. - that sort of thing would be especially good).
If you're currently at 138 pounds, heading for 125, what deficit (percent or number of calories subtracted from TDEE) gets you to 1460, at your level of exercise? (I'm a sedentary li'l ol lady at a slightly lower weight than you, and I'd lose like a house afire at those calories, with your exercise activity level.)
OP said she was doing 35%, which isn't low fat at all (she said lower than using the 75 g number discussed above, not super low). My math comes out at about 57 g or .46 g/goal weight.
You're right, of course. OP, I'm sorry: I didn't read closely enough. Apologies.The rest of your calories after protein and fats would be carbs. So in your case if you had 125g protein, 75g fat then it would be 500 cals (125g x 4 cals)+ 675 cals (75g x 9cals) = 1175 cals, so carbs would make up the rest. If for example your intake is 2000 that would be 825 cals left (so about 206g carbs since each gram is 4cals)
Keep in mind those are minimums so you can definitely increase protein and fat as you prefer if you don't want carbs that high.
Hope that makes sense and didn't confuse.
So after using my 1460 cals; the carbs look like 71. Which is pretty close to what I'm doing now. I just have my protein higher and the fats lower. Interesting.....
The MFP defaults aren't crazy for most people, and things in that general region may be OK, too.
Depending on how low your fats go, that could be a potential problem. If you're eating high-ish fiber (my preference), getting fat too low is a pretty common cause of constipation (and we see that here, IMO, sometimes among people who try to cut fat really far because it's calorie dense, then turn around and eat a lot of highfiber veggies). Fat is also important for hormone balance (especially for women), and cellular health, among other things. Some people find fat satiating, also (I don't, personally).
I won't try to tell you what "super low" is, but I gave you my target ratios above and others have said similar things. If you're not very far off, you're probably fine. If you're consistently quite far under that recommendation on fat, you might want to sacrifice some carbs or protein to get a bit more in (nuts, seeds, avocados, olive oil, etc. - that sort of thing would be especially good).
If you're currently at 138 pounds, heading for 125, what deficit (percent or number of calories subtracted from TDEE) gets you to 1460, at your level of exercise? (I'm a sedentary li'l ol lady at a slightly lower weight than you, and I'd lose like a house afire at those calories, with your exercise activity level.)
I don't know how it got to 1460....I just used the calculators and that's what the majority of them gave me as a "lose weight" (vs maintain weight) number......
If I assume you're age 30 & 5'6", Sailrabbit (which is multi-formula) suggests your TDEE (without a deficit) at moderately active (exercise or sports 4-5 days a week) would be 1866 to 2134, which would be a deficit of 406-674, so 1460 would be an estimated loss rate of about 0.8-1.3 pounds a week. With 13 pounds to goal, and a desire to preserve or build muscle (how I'm reading "lean look"), the 0.8 might be OK for a few more pounds, but around 10 pounds above goal is about where I got serious about limiting loss to more like 0.5lb/week (that would be 1616-1884 at the Sailrabbit settings I mentioned (which may not be correct; I guessed at them)). Just my opinion, obviously.3 -
What rate of loss did you select though? Because as Ann said, that seems low for the amount of activity you are doing. How tall are you?
Also, the reason for the change in body composition with lower carbs is a drop in water weight, as a result of lower glycogen (stored carbohydrate) levels in your muscles.[/quote]
I think i chose 1 pound per week....
I'm 5'2; 45 yrs old; female; sedentary job but workout consistently at a moderate to intense effort.
So on the body comp change....once the water weight is gone then those changes will be slower right?
And is the 70something g carbs considered "low" if its 20% of my cals?0 -
deannalfisher wrote: »
Mine - I use a nutrition team to provide me mine
that's awesome! it sure beats doing all this math!0 -
The rest of your calories after protein and fats would be carbs. So in your case if you had 125g protein, 75g fat then it would be 500 cals (125g x 4 cals)+ 675 cals (75g x 9cals) = 1175 cals, so carbs would make up the rest. If for example your intake is 2000 that would be 825 cals left (so about 206g carbs since each gram is 4cals)
Keep in mind those are minimums so you can definitely increase protein and fat as you prefer if you don't want carbs that high.
Hope that makes sense and didn't confuse.
So after using my 1460 cals; the carbs look like 71. Which is pretty close to what I'm doing now. I just have my protein higher and the fats lower. Interesting.....
The MFP defaults aren't crazy for most people, and things in that general region may be OK, too.
Depending on how low your fats go, that could be a potential problem. If you're eating high-ish fiber (my preference), getting fat too low is a pretty common cause of constipation (and we see that here, IMO, sometimes among people who try to cut fat really far because it's calorie dense, then turn around and eat a lot of highfiber veggies). Fat is also important for hormone balance (especially for women), and cellular health, among other things. Some people find fat satiating, also (I don't, personally).
I won't try to tell you what "super low" is, but I gave you my target ratios above and others have said similar things. If you're not very far off, you're probably fine. If you're consistently quite far under that recommendation on fat, you might want to sacrifice some carbs or protein to get a bit more in (nuts, seeds, avocados, olive oil, etc. - that sort of thing would be especially good).
If you're currently at 138 pounds, heading for 125, what deficit (percent or number of calories subtracted from TDEE) gets you to 1460, at your level of exercise? (I'm a sedentary li'l ol lady at a slightly lower weight than you, and I'd lose like a house afire at those calories, with your exercise activity level.)
OP said she was doing 35%, which isn't low fat at all (she said lower than using the 75 g number discussed above, not super low). My math comes out at about 57 g or .46 g/goal weight.
You're right, of course. OP, I'm sorry: I didn't read closely enough. Apologies.The rest of your calories after protein and fats would be carbs. So in your case if you had 125g protein, 75g fat then it would be 500 cals (125g x 4 cals)+ 675 cals (75g x 9cals) = 1175 cals, so carbs would make up the rest. If for example your intake is 2000 that would be 825 cals left (so about 206g carbs since each gram is 4cals)
Keep in mind those are minimums so you can definitely increase protein and fat as you prefer if you don't want carbs that high.
Hope that makes sense and didn't confuse.
So after using my 1460 cals; the carbs look like 71. Which is pretty close to what I'm doing now. I just have my protein higher and the fats lower. Interesting.....
The MFP defaults aren't crazy for most people, and things in that general region may be OK, too.
Depending on how low your fats go, that could be a potential problem. If you're eating high-ish fiber (my preference), getting fat too low is a pretty common cause of constipation (and we see that here, IMO, sometimes among people who try to cut fat really far because it's calorie dense, then turn around and eat a lot of highfiber veggies). Fat is also important for hormone balance (especially for women), and cellular health, among other things. Some people find fat satiating, also (I don't, personally).
I won't try to tell you what "super low" is, but I gave you my target ratios above and others have said similar things. If you're not very far off, you're probably fine. If you're consistently quite far under that recommendation on fat, you might want to sacrifice some carbs or protein to get a bit more in (nuts, seeds, avocados, olive oil, etc. - that sort of thing would be especially good).
If you're currently at 138 pounds, heading for 125, what deficit (percent or number of calories subtracted from TDEE) gets you to 1460, at your level of exercise? (I'm a sedentary li'l ol lady at a slightly lower weight than you, and I'd lose like a house afire at those calories, with your exercise activity level.)
I don't know how it got to 1460....I just used the calculators and that's what the majority of them gave me as a "lose weight" (vs maintain weight) number......
If I assume you're age 30 & 5'6", Sailrabbit (which is multi-formula) suggests your TDEE (without a deficit) at moderately active (exercise or sports 4-5 days a week) would be 1866 to 2134, which would be a deficit of 406-674, so 1460 would be an estimated loss rate of about 0.8-1.3 pounds a week. With 13 pounds to goal, and a desire to preserve or build muscle (how I'm reading "lean look"), the 0.8 might be OK for a few more pounds, but around 10 pounds above goal is about where I got serious about limiting loss to more like 0.5lb/week (that would be 1616-1884 at the Sailrabbit settings I mentioned (which may not be correct; I guessed at them)). Just my opinion, obviously.
THANK YOU for making me much taller and younger!!!! Ha. I'm only 5'2; 45 yrs old. I'll take my age though cause i'm that much closer to retirement.....:)0 -
What rate of loss did you select though? Because as Ann said, that seems low for the amount of activity you are doing. How tall are you?
Also, the reason for the change in body composition with lower carbs is a drop in water weight, as a result of lower glycogen (stored carbohydrate) levels in your muscles.
I think i chose 1 pound per week....
I'm 5'2; 45 yrs old; female; sedentary job but workout consistently at a moderate to intense effort.
So on the body comp change....once the water weight is gone then those changes will be slower right?
And is the 70something g carbs considered "low" if its 20% of my cals? [/quote]
Okay, that sounds reasonable given your height.
And yes, the water weight loss has done all it's going to probably (if you eat higher carbs, it will come back on, too). Any further body comp changes will come from fat loss or muscle gain (second one not very likely eating at a deficit). 70-odd grams of carbs is definitely low. Anything below 100-150g is considered lower carb. It's the gram amount that matters, not the total percentage of calories.1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions