Macros

Counting calories while watching macros is generally equivalent to counting macros while watching calories. Each macro has an approximate characteristic calorie level: Protein and carbs are about 4 calories per gram, fats about 9 calories per gram, alcohol (which isn't any of the other macros but has calorie) is about 7 calories per gram.

So, count one of (calories, macros), watch the other: You get to about the same destination either way.

I agree that it's calories that matter directly for weight management, but disagree with the common statement here that macros are unimportant, or that macros other than protein are unimportant. Most of us want to be healthy - I hope? - not just thin.

Certainly, we need some fats (really certain essential fatty acids (EFAs) in the fats) in addition to protein, because our bodies can't manufacture the EFAs out of anything else. That's similar to the essential amino acid (EAA) reasoning about protein. We need a minimum of EFAs and EAAs, but more is fine within reason.

Carbs are potentially more flexible than protein/fat, unless a person has an individual reason to reduce or increase them. (Manage them if diabetic or insulin resistant, reduce them if they spike your appetite, increase them if low carb tanks your energy level - that sort of thing.)

Macros are important for health and body composition, but IMO there's no exact universal perfect formula that applies to everyone (context matters), and they don't need to be exact every day (close on average over a few days should be fine).

Macros can have an indirect effect on weight management, since sub-ideal nutrition has the potential to reduce energy level (so we move less, burn fewer calories) or spike appetite (so we find it too hard to stick to a sensible calorie intake long term). The direct effect on weight is still via calories.

Micronutrients are also important, including various phytonutrients that aren't strictly vitamins or minerals, plus probiotics and prebiotics may matter, and more.

There's no reason to obsess about any/all of that: Usually a well rounded way of eating with complete/bioavailable protein, healthy fat sources, and plenty of varied, colorful veggies/fruits will get us there. Saying we don't need to obsessively count all the nutrients (which I believe is true) is not the same as saying the nutrients aren't important (which I believe is false).

I've only ever tracked calories and protein (in grams). The rest pretty much takes care of itself.

lkhausman123 wrote: »

What percent of your total cals should be protein/carbs/fats? Ive seen various versions. I want to lose weight and build muscle.

@lkhausman123 (and OP): Don't use percents. Figure out your minimum needs for protein and fats in grams, then use carbs (or extra of the other two macros) to balance calories to your goal. (For building muscle, I'd recommend not doing low carb, FWIW.)

This is an evidence-based source for estimating protein needs:

https://examine.com/protein-intake-calculator/
https://examine.com/guides/protein-intake/

Note that the guide mentions that if you're materially overweight, it can make sense to base estimates on your healthy goal weight - using a very-overweight current weight can make the protein goal unnecessarily high and hard to reach. (It's OK to estimate goal weight, the difference a few pounds makes won't be huge.)

For fats, something in the range of 0.35-0.45 grams per day per pound of weight should be OK, maybe lower in that range if male, maybe better higher if female.

You also need other nutrition: Micronutrients, phytochemicals, fiber, possibly probiotics. I'd recommend eating larger than average amounts of varied, colorful veggies and fruits, plus some probiotic foods (such as live-culture yogurt or kefir, raw miso, etc.)

Most important is a good progressive strength training program, faithfully performed.

Muscle mass gain is always very gradual, requiring patience. During weight loss, it will be even slower. If you don't have excess weight to the point of health risk now, losing very slowly would slightly improve those odds. (Talking maybe half a pound a week loss, or less.) Another option is to lose fat somewhat more aggressively (0.5% of current weight per week, say), strength train to preserve existing muscle mass, and expect more gain after you reach goal weight and can increase calories to maintenance or even slightly over.

I tweaked my macros a lot over a couple years, and settled on a very low carb diet. Because of this, I mainly focus on tracking carbs. As long as I stay under about 20 grams, I'm good.

The others may be a little high/little low for the day but by the end of the week it tends to average out.

My current macros are set for 5% carbs/ 25% protein/ 70% fat and calories are set to 1500 per day. If I stick to my macros I usually only eat around 1200 more or less on average because it's filling enough for me.

There's no perfect balance IMO; really depends on the individual, their needs, their preferences, etc. I say tweak them till you find your sweet spot.