Calculating Calorie and Macronutrient Needs

[Emma-Leigh]

Calculating Calories and Macro's
Please note - the following should be taken as general advice only and should not be used in the face of medical contraindications. Please consult your physician before starting any diet or nutrition plan.

Basic Terminology
1/ BMR (Basal Metabolic Rate): The amount of calories you need to consume to maintain your body if you were comatose (base level).
2/ NEAT (Non-Exercise Associated Thermogenesis): The calorie of daily activity that is NOT exercise (eg: washing, walking, talking, shopping, working). ie: INCIDENTAL EXERCISE! It is something that everyone has a good amount of control over.
3/ EAT (Exercise Associated Thermogenesis): The calorie requirements associated with planned exercise. Unless someone is doing a whole heap of exercise (eg: two or more hrs training a day) it usually doesn't add a stack of calories to your requirements (30 minutes of 'elliptical training isn't going to do it')
4/ TEF (Thermic effect of feeding): The calorie expenditure associated with eating. REGARDLESS of what myths you have been told - this is NOT dependent on MEAL FREQUENCY. It is a % of TOTAL CALORIES CONSUMED (and 15% of 3 x 600 cal meals is the same as 15% of 6 x 300 cal meals). It varies according to MACRONUTRIENT content and FIBER content. For most mixed diets, it is something around 15%. Protein is higher (up to 25%), carbs are variable (between 5-25%), and fats are low (usually less than 5%). So -> More protein and more carbs and more fiber = HIGHER TEF. More FAT = LOWER TEF.
5/ TEE (Total Energy Expenditure): The total calories you require - and the sum of the above (BMR + NEAT + EAT + TEF).

How much do you need?
A multitude of things impact MAINTENANCE calorie needs.
- Age & sex (males generally need > females)
- Total weight & lean mass (more lean mass = more needed)
- Physiological status (eg: sick or injured, pregnant, growth')
- Hormones
- Exercise level (more activity = more needed)
- Daily activity level (more activity = more needed)
- Diet (that is - macronutrient intake)

In order to calculate your requirements the most accurate measure is via Calorimetry [the measure of 'chemical reactions' in your body & the heat produced by these reactions], either directly (via placing a calorimeter where the heat you produce is measured) or indirectly (eg: HOOD studies where they monitor how much oxygen you use/ carbon dioxide and nitrogen you excrete over a given time). But although accurate they are completely impractical for most people & we mostly rely on pre-set formula to calculate our needs.

NOTE: IF YOU ARE LESS THAN 18 YRS OF AGE - THESE FORMULA WILL NOT BE ACCURATE!There is an energy cost associated with growth / inefficient movement / high surface area:mass ratio. Look HERE for alternatives.
As a teenager I would also STRONGLY suggest you don't obsess on calories and macros! Eat well, exercise regularly, and have fun while you can!

Estimating Requirements
The simplest method is to base your intake on a standard 'calories per unit of weight (usually kilograms)'. Typically:
- 26 to 30 kcals/kg/day for normal, healthy individuals with sedentary lifestyles doing little physical activity [12.0-14 kcal/pound]
- 31 to 37 kcal/kg/day for those involved in light to moderate activity 3-5 x a week with moderately active lifestyles [14-16 kcal/ pound]
- 38 to 40 kcals/kg/day for those involved in vigorous activity and highly active jobs [16-18 kcal/ pound].
For those involved in HEAVY training (eg: athletes) - the demand is greater:
- 41 to 50 kcals/kg/day for those involved in moderate to heavy training (for example: 15-20 hrs/ week training) [18.5-22 kcal/ pound]
- 50 or above kcals/kg/day for those involved in heavy to extreme training [> 22 kcal/ pound]

There are then a number of other formula which calculate BMR. This means it calculates what you need should you be in a coma.
1/ Harris-Benedict formula: Very inaccurate. It was derived from studies on LEAN, YOUNG, ACTIVE males MANY YEARS AGO (1919). Notorious for OVERESTIMATING requirements, especially in the overweight. IF YOU CAN AVOID IT, DON'T USE IT!
MEN: BMR = 66 + [13.7 x weight (kg)] + [5 x height (cm)] - [6.76 x age (years)]
WOMEN: BMR = 655 + [9.6 x weight (kg)] + [1.8 x height (cm)] - [4.7 x age (years)]

2/Mifflin-St Jeor: Developed in the 1990s and more realistic in todays settings. It still doesn't take into consideration the differences as a consequence of high BF%. Thus, once again, it OVERESTIMATES NEEDS, ESPECIALLY IN THE OVERWEIGHT.
MEN: BMR = [9.99 x weight (kg)] + [6.25 x height (cm)] - [4.92 x age (years)] + 5
WOMEN: BMR = [9.99 x weight (kg)] + [6.25 x height (cm)] - [4.92 x age (years)] -161

3/Katch-McArdle:Considered the most accurate formula for those who are relatively lean. Use ONLY if you have a good estimate of your bodyfat %.
BMR = 370 + (21.6 x LBM)Where LBM = [total weight (kg) x (100 - bodyfat %)]/100

As these are only BMR calculations To convert BMR to a TOTAL requirement you need to multiply the result of your BMR by an 'activity variable' to give TEE.
The Activity Factor is the TOTAL cost of living, NOT JUST YOUR TRAINING. Think about it - if you train 1 hr a day - WHAT ARE YOU DOING THE OTHER 23 HRS?! So MORE important than training -- it includes work, life activities, training/sport & the TEF of ~15% (an average mixed diet).
Average activity variables are:
1.2 = Sedentary (Desk job, and Little Formal Exercise)
1.3-1.4 = Lightly Active (Light daily activity AND light exercise 1-3 days a week)
1.5-1.6 = Moderately Active (Moderately daily Activity & Moderate exercise 3-5 days a week)
1.7-1.8 = Very Active (Physically demanding lifestyle & Hard exercise 6-7 days a week)
1.9-2.2 = Extremely Active (Athlete in ENDURANCE training or VERY HARD physical job)

How Accurate are they?: They give rough ball-park figures and are still 'guesstimations'. So the aim is to use these as 'rough figures', monitor your weight/ measurements for 2-4 weeks, & IF your weight is stable/ measurements are stable, you have likely found maintenance.

Using the Above to Recalculate Based on Goals
You then need to DECREASE or INCREASE intake based on your goals (eg: lose or gain mass). It is not recommended to use a 'generic calorie amounts' (eg: 500 cals/ day). Instead this should be calculated on a % of your maintenance. Why? The effect of different calorie amounts is going to be markedly different based on someones size/ total calorie intake. For example - subtracting 500 cals/ day from a 1500 total intake is 1/3rd of the total cals, where 500 cals/ day from 3000 total intake is only 1/6th of the total. The results will therefore be markedly different on an individuals energy level & weight loss. Generally:
- To ADD weight: ADD 10-20% calories to the total above
- To LOSE weight: SUBTRACT 10-20% calories from the total above
Then monitor your results and adjust as required.

Macronutrient Needs
Once you work out calorie needs, you then work out how much of each macronutrient you should aim for. This is one of the areas that is MOST often confused but This should NOT be based on a RATIO of macro intakes. (eg: '30:40:30 or 40:40:20') Your body doesn't CARE what % intake you have. It works based on SUFFICIENT QUANTITY per MASS.

So to try to make it as simple as possible:
1. Protein: Protein intake is a bit of a controversial issue in nutrition. The general recommendations given in the 'bodybuilding' area are nearly double the 'standard' recommendations given in the Sports Nutrition Arena.
The GENERAL sports nutrition guideline based on clinical trials suggest that in the face of ADEQUATE calories and CARBS the following protein intakes are sufficient:
STRENGTH training -> 1.4 to 2g per KG bodyweight (about .6 / pound)
ENDURANCE training -> 1.2 to 1.8g per KG bodyweight (about .8 / pound)
ADOLESCENT in training -> 1.8 to 2.2g per KG bodyweight (about 1g / pound)
BUT researchers also acknowledge that protein becomes MORE important in the context of LOWER calorie intakes, or LOWER carb intakes.
Recent evidence also suggests that protein intakes of 3g/kg help with physiological and psychological stressors associated with high volume or intense training.
One should also note that ADEQUATE v's OPTIMAL is not discussed when it comes to hypertrophy v's performance.
And lastly - you need to consider thermogenics/ satiety/ and personal preference.

So - General 'bodybuilding' guidelines for protein would be as follows:
- Moderate bodyfat and training load = 2.2-2.8g per kg TOTAL weight (about 1-1.25g per pound)
- Very Low bodyfat or Very Low Calorie or High training load = 2.4 - 3g per kg TOTAL weight (1.1-1.35g per pound)
- High bodyfat, high calorie, or low training load = 1.6 to 2.2g per kg TOTAL weight (.75 - 1g per pound)
Anecdotally, as most find HIGHER protein intake better for satiety, partitioning, blood sugar control, and hypertrophy. UNLESS you have medical reasons for lower protein, or unless guided to use the GENERAL sports nutrition guidelines, I would suggest the BODYBUILDING values.


2. Fats: Generally speaking, although the body can get away with short periods of very low fat, in the long run your body NEEDS fat to maintain health, satiety, and sanity. Additionally - any form of high intensity training will benefit from a 'fat buffer' in your diet - which controls free radical damage & inflammation. General guides:
Average or low bodyfat: 1 - 2g fat/ kg body weight [between 0.40 - 1g total weight/ pounds]
High bodyfat: 1-2g fat/ Kg LEAN weight [between 0.4 - 1g LEAN weight/ pounds]
Low calorie dieting - you can decrease further, but as a minimum, I would not suggest LESS than about 0.30g/ pound.
Note 1: Total fat intake is NOT the same as 'essential fats' (essential fats are specific TYPES of fats that are INCLUDED in your total fat intake)...


3. Carbs: For carbs there are no specific 'requirements' for your body so - but carbs are important for athletes, ACTIVE individuals, or those trying to GAIN MASS. [carbs help with workout intensity, health, & satiety (+ sanity)]. This means if you are an athlete involved in a good volume of training I would suggest you CALCULATE a requirement for carbs as a PRIORITY - then go back and calculate protein / fat:
Moderately active: 4.5 - 6.5 g/ kg (about 2 - 3g/ pound)
High active: 6.5 - 8.5 g/ kg (about 3 - 4g/ pound)
INTENSE activity: + 8.5g / kg (more than 4g/ pound)

For 'others' - simply carbohydrate intakes via the calories left over from fats/ protein:
carb cals = Total cal needs - ([protein grams above x 4] + [fat grams above x 9])
carb grams = (above cals)/ 4


How do I count Calories accurately? *Check out Calorie Counting Websites

What are Macronutrients and Micronutrients? *Check out Macro & micronutrients explained!

PLEASE NOTE: If you create a spreadsheet & post them in this thread I will DELETE THEM.
The point is for people to DO THE MATHS and THINK about what they need WITHOUT resorting to a pre-generated 'spit out' number!
Thanks.

[Dive_Bum]

Macronutrient Needs
Right... Once you work out how many CALORIES you need to reach your goals - > And this should NOT be based on a generic RATIO of total calorie intake such as '30:40:30 or 40:40:20. Your body doesn't CARE what % intake you have for macronutrients. It works in terms of QUANTITY and therefore your level should relate back to your BODY and your bodies NEEDS in terms of LEAN MASS and ACTIVITY!!!



Awesome post, as always, Emma! I'm curious, though, what you mean when you say that the generic ratios aren't relevant and that it 'works in terms of quantity.' Could you explain further? Is following a 50p 30c 20f pointless as long as I get in 1.5 (ish) g of protein per body weight, for example?

[Emma-Leigh]

Awesome post, as always, Emma! I'm curious, though, what you mean when you say that the generic ratios aren't relevant and that it 'works in terms of quantity.' Could you explain further? Is following a 50p 30c 20f pointless as long as I get in 1.5 (ish) g of protein per body weight, for example?

Thanks.

With regards to quantity - it means exactly as it sounds: Your body will need a GRAM amount per WEIGHT/ LEAN MASS of your protein and fat intake. And this should not be based entirely on how many calories you are consuming.

For example: If you were to simply use the generic values you write of 50% P, 30% C, 20% fat:
Say your maintenance was ~ 2000 cals. That is = 250g P/ 150g C/ 45g F Do you honestly think that at only 132# you reallly need 250g P? [that is nearly 2 x your weight]!
Say you were then trying to GAIN weight [eg: ~ 2400 cals] = 300g protein [even MORE of an outrageous number for someone your size = 2.27 x weight]...

Instead, if you base it on the equations above:
At maintenance Calorie needs: 2000 cals.... 1-1.5 x weight = 135-195g protein [27-40%]... You would then divide the rest of your calories up for fat (anything between 0.35 and 1 x weight) and then carbs
At above maintenance Calorie needs: 2400 cals... 1-1.5 x weight = 135-195g protein [22-33%].... And once again, you would then divide cals up for fat (0.35-1 x weight) and carbs.
At below maintenance calorie needs: 1600 cals... 1-1.5 x weight = 135-195g protein [33-48%]... Then the rest as fats (0.35-1 x weight) and carbs.

[imperfectly_lou]

Fantastic post as always Em Hopefully it will help clear up a lot of confusion a lot of new members seem to have had recently.

[FemmeFatale28]

I have a few questions if Im 168 with BF of 29% ( was told 27% but Im upping it) does thi mean by that calculation I have 120lbs of lean body mass? Did I do that right? Also, if my goal is to lose 30lbs (relatively speaking, I dont care about the scale much) size 4 clothing. ( I wear a 7 now) should I calculate for the "overweight" and Lean Mass of 120? Because with getting 1 X BW = protein and .35 X 168 = fat works pretty good for my 40/40/20 on 1700-1800 calories. However if I dont need those numbers that high then I should fix it. I would like to focus on lowering carbs but with these equations it pretty much puts carbs cals equal with protein cals which relates back to the 40/40/20 Im doing now.


Also, the boards have confused me on if you are trying to lose weight, some say higher fat than carb ratio burns fat because women burn lipidsas opposed to glycogen first, and some say .4 x BW = no lower or its not healthy..

aye aye aye.. hope I made sense, if not I can clarify lol

[Dive_Bum]

Thanks.

With regards to quantity - it means exactly as it sounds: Your body will need a GRAM amount per WEIGHT/ LEAN MASS of your protein and fat intake. And this should not be based entirely on how many calories you are consuming.

For example: If you were to simply use the generic values you write of 50% P, 30% C, 20% fat:
Say your maintenance was ~ 2000 cals. That is = 250g P/ 150g C/ 45g F Do you honestly think that at only 132# you reallly need 250g P? [that is nearly 2 x your weight]!
Say you were then trying to GAIN weight [eg: ~ 2400 cals] = 300g protein [even MORE of an outrageous number for someone your size = 2.27 x weight]...

Instead, if you base it on the equations above:
At maintenance Calorie needs: 2000 cals.... 1-1.5 x weight = 135-195g protein [27-40%]... You would then divide the rest of your calories up for fat (anything between 0.35 and 1 x weight) and then carbs
At above maintenance Calorie needs: 2400 cals... 1-1.5 x weight = 135-195g protein [22-33%].... And once again, you would then divide cals up for fat (0.35-1 x weight) and carbs.
At below maintenance calorie needs: 1600 cals... 1-1.5 x weight = 135-195g protein [33-48%]... Then the rest as fats (0.35-1 x weight) and carbs.

See, that is exactly what I have been thinking! I kept looking at my protein consumption and it seemed so high for my weight, way more than 1.5g per lb. According to the amount of fat you say is needed, I should be eating roughly around 65g a day...right now I'm eating at 1800 (not trying to lose weight, just in the process of increasing cals from a long and ridiculous deficit and reset my metabolism), so thats about 195g of protein at max, 65g of fat and about 110g of carbs. Does this sound about right? Thanks so much for helping out here, it's making things much clearer!

[ajangel25]

When it comes to post-workout nutrition, is it better to eat a fruit for your carb or a whole-grain?

[Emma-Leigh]

When it comes to post-workout nutrition, is it better to eat a fruit for your carb or a whole-grain?

For most trainee's I disagree with putting things into 'good' and 'bad' categories.... Especially in regards to things that are so variable in their application...

In this instance: There is good evidence to show that a variety of carb sources will help with recovery/ restoring glycogen stores... But the specific 'needs' of any one individuals PWO nutrition will depend on things such as your pre-workout nutrition, training type/ intensity and duration, your individuals diet (eg: keto, targetted keto, IF), your calorie needs, any specific goals for your body/physique/training, your physiology and insulin sensitivity, and (importantly) - your personal preference.

So instead of trying to choose - Why not get a good mix of both? Or - why even limit to 'fruit' or 'whole-grain'? What about milk/dairy? It also has a lot of evidence to support it's use as a great source PWO...

Swap things around - see what you respond better too.

[ajangel25]

Ok great! I'd rather eat what I like anyway haha! I was also wondering if it matters if the whey is baked in terms of getting to your muscles quick enough. I like to make little "protein cakes" by microwaving the whey with some egg whites.. does the whey still get to your body quick enough even if it's heated up?

[RBeck_101]

*sniffs* I'm so hungry every day of my mealplan. I can't help but eat another spoonful of peanut butter, or another piece of chicken.... I'm even trying to take VPX Meltdown to curb my appetite, but it's not working.

I'm trying to do everything right in regards to what I need to eat to lose weight. Under both calculations, I should be consuming 1,247 calories (15% less than 1,467) to lose weight, but my stomach and brain keep telling me that I want/need more.

My food is designed exactly like all the others in regards to nutrition. It's immaculately clean and balanced. Can anyone tell me what's wrong with me?

[Emma-Leigh]

*sniffs* I'm so hungry every day of my mealplan. I can't help but eat another spoonful of peanut butter, or another piece of chicken.... I'm even trying to take VPX Meltdown to curb my appetite, but it's not working.

I'm trying to do everything right in regards to what I need to eat to lose weight. Under both calculations, I should be consuming 1,247 calories (15% less than 1,467) to lose weight, but my stomach and brain keep telling me that I want/need more.

My food is designed exactly like all the others in regards to nutrition. It's immaculately clean and balanced. Can anyone tell me what's wrong with me?

1. How are you getting 1467 as your total energy expenditure? Unless you are lying in a coma somewhere your total energy needs should be far greater than this....

I have a suspicion 1467 is your BMR (basal metabolic rate) and you neglected to factor in your activity level (multiply by the numbers given in the post).


2. Having an 'immaculately clean' diet = BS. Don't be fooled that this will get you superior results >> it will likely just lead you to feeling deprived and bitter... which will make dieting 10 x harder than it already is.

[RBeck_101]

1. How are you getting 1467 as your total energy expenditure? Unless you are lying in a coma somewhere your total energy needs should be far greater than this....

I have a suspicion 1467 is your BMR (basal metabolic rate) and you neglected to factor in your activity level (multiply by the numbers given in the post).


2. Having an 'immaculately clean' diet = BS. Don't be fooled that this will get you superior results >> it will likely just lead you to feeling deprived and bitter... which will make dieting 10 x harder than it already is.

Thank you for clearing that up!
Doing the extra calculation it showed me at 1,870 (less the 15%) to lose weight.

I've been working on eating strictly "clean" for a while now (with some slip-ups due to aroma of pizza nearby) but other than that, I've been really enjoying the diet actually... It seems immaculate because compared to what I used to eat on a daily basis, this is such new ground I'm starting to cover on my beginning path to be like others on this site like yourself. It is truly an honor, and I don't want to make too many slip-ups trying to do this the right way. Thank you so much for your time and input!

[SmokeyNite]

Just a quick (if stupid!) question. In the 40/40/20 or 40/30/30 or whatever, what does each number represent? Is it Protein/Fat/Carbs or Carbs/Protein/Fat?? What do each of the numbers relate to?

I'm having a hard time getting my protein up and fat down. I'll eat eggs for breakfast, soup for lunch, fruit and stuff in there for a snack, and lean steak or chicken and beans for dinner and yet my fat % is way high and my protein always seems so low. Most days I barely break 20% in protein.

[AussieLass]

Excellent post,thank you!!

[krissy_87]

I want your braiiiiin Emma-Leigh!!! hehe. Seriously, your knowledge on this stuff is awesome.

The thing I would like to know is on the mathematical side of things, how do you convert percentages into grams? For example, how do you translate 40% carbs into grams per day? Sorry if it's a dopey question but I honestly don't know how to convert percentages.

[Emma-Leigh]

I want your braiiiiin Emma-Leigh!!! hehe. Seriously, your knowledge on this stuff is awesome.

Thank you.

The thing I would like to know is on the mathematical side of things, how do you convert percentages into grams? For example, how do you translate 40% carbs into grams per day? Sorry if it's a dopey question but I honestly don't know how to convert percentages.

Firstly: To quote my post ->

Once you work out how many CALORIES you need to reach your goals you need to work out how much of each particular macronutrient you should aim for > This should NOT be based on a generic RATIO of total calorie intake such as '30:40:30 or 40:40:20. Your body doesn't CARE what % intake you have for macronutrients. It works in terms of QUANTITY and therefore your level should relate back to your BODY and your bodies NEEDS in terms of LEAN MASS and ACTIVITY!!!

So if anything - you would covert GRAMS to % (because you should base your intake on how many GRAMS you need - not how many CALORIES you need).

So if you must:
1g carb = 4 calories
1g protein = 4 calories
1g fat = 9 calories

Thus, if your intake was, say:
Cal Need: 1600 cals
And - 160g protein [4 x 160 = 640]/ 1600 = 40%
And - 50g fat [9 x 50 = 450]/1600 = 28%
And carbs = remaining = 1600 cals - (fat cals + protein cals) = 510 cals (31%)

But.... why bother?

[crouton]

I want your braiiiiin Emma-Leigh!!! hehe. Seriously, your knowledge on this stuff is awesome.

The thing I would like to know is on the mathematical side of things, how do you convert percentages into grams? For example, how do you translate 40% carbs into grams per day? Sorry if it's a dopey question but I honestly don't know how to convert percentages.

You divide the calories you get by the calories per gram.

Fat = 9 calories / gram
Carbs = 4 calories / gram
Protein = 4 calories / gram

So if you need 1600 and your protein is 40%, = 640 calories / 4 = 160 grams. You do the same with your carbs and your fats would be divided by 9.

I know, I messed up setting up the grams on Sparkpeople until I realized that 640 wasn't grams, it was calories. But right now, even though I have that stuff set up, I am just trying right now to eat healthier within my calorie range. Once I reach my goal weight I will probably pay more attention to the breakdown.

[CAYENNE73]

that is awesome Emm,

WOW, I can use someone like you to help me achieve my goal. Any chance of you moving to Canada soon..loL?.
Finding someone on here from Canada is rare.
Your info was amazing, and great for new learners. I knew this stuff but you see it in different places and I always have to go back & reference to it everynow & then.

What's your status right now?

Thank you.


Firstly: To quote my post ->

So if anything - you would covert GRAMS to % (because you should base your intake on how many GRAMS you need - not how many CALORIES you need).

So if you must:
1g carb = 4 calories
1g protein = 4 calories
1g fat = 9 calories

Thus, if your intake was, say:
Cal Need: 1600 cals
And - 160g protein [4 x 160 = 640]/ 1600 = 40%
And - 50g fat [9 x 50 = 450]/1600 = 28%
And carbs = remaining = 1600 cals - (fat cals + protein cals) = 510 cals (31%)

But.... why bother?

[FitWish]

Very Helpful! You have no idea!

[shecould]

This has been extremely helpful, thank you for sharing. I do have a few quick questions. I am 128 lbs. and have calculated my BF% online to be 13.5% in Navy standards and 25% in YMCA standards. Is one more accurate than the other, what do people typically use as the standard?

Also, when calculating my Carbohydrate requirements I seem to be getting an awfully high number. Does this seem correct? I calculated a TEE of 2,818.94 with a 10% reduction in calories at the moderate activity level. ( I work out 6 days a week with weight training x2, bodyweight training x3 and cardio on weekends.) Using the lean mass calculations, I calculated a protein requirement of 192g and fat requirement of 64g. Once I subtracted the protein caloric intake and the fat caloric intake from my TEE I had a remainder of 1,474.96. Once divided by the 4 calories/g I have a total carbohydrate intake of 368.74g.

I'm sorry for the long winded explanation, I have been following this site for about 2 years now and was so excited about your post that I was really motivated to toss out my current 40-40-20 diet and join the forum. Thanks

[imperfectly_lou]

This has been extremely helpful, thank you for sharing. I do have a few quick questions. I am 128 lbs. and have calculated my BF% online to be 13.5% in Navy standards and 25% in YMCA standards. Is one more accurate than the other, what do people typically use as the standard?

It is impossible to properly calculate your body fat online. It isn't a formula. Two people can have exactly the same size and weight and be totally different body shapes and hence have difference body composition. E.g. a skinny fat 5"6 at 125lbs versus the same height of rock hard muscle.

The gold standard for body fat testing is DEXA scanning or hydrostastic testing. A 7 point caliper test is OK, depending on the skill of the person doing the test. Any handheld device or scale is rubbish as it is heavily affected by your hydration level.

[imperfectly_lou]

Also, when calculating my Carbohydrate requirements I seem to be getting an awfully high number. Does this seem correct? I calculated a TEE of 2,818.94 with a 10% reduction in calories at the moderate activity level. ( I work out 6 days a week with weight training x2, bodyweight training x3 and cardio on weekends.) Using the lean mass calculations, I calculated a protein requirement of 192g and fat requirement of 64g. Once I subtracted the protein caloric intake and the fat caloric intake from my TEE I had a remainder of 1,474.96. Once divided by the 4 calories/g I have a total carbohydrate intake of 368.74g.

I'm sorry for the long winded explanation, I have been following this site for about 2 years now and was so excited about your post that I was really motivated to toss out my current 40-40-20 diet and join the forum. Thanks

Which fomula did u use? That does seem very high...

[shecould]

Sorry about that. I calculated my kg conversion incorrectly. This time I came up with the following:

TTE = 2,226.32 -10% = 2,003.668

P = 192g
F = 64g
C = 164g

Quite a difference from my old 40-40-20 of 2,500 calories with 250 P, 250 C, & 55.56 F

I'm really psyched about this, thank you for the help. So sorry for the silly mistake. I can't believe I missed that and go figure - I'm a bookkeeper! By the way, congrats on your engagement

[shecould]

Hmm, what would you recommend for inputting into the BF% for the Katch-McArdle Formula? I used the higher of 25% to be safe. Plus I noticed a number of fitness models similar in my height noted a BF% of 12 in the off season and I don't look as fit as them, haha.

[imperfectly_lou]

Sorry about that. I calculated my kg conversion incorrectly. This time I came up with the following:

TTE = 2,226.32 -10% = 2,003.668

P = 192g
F = 64g
C = 164g

Quite a difference from my old 40-40-20 of 2,500 calories with 250 P, 250 C, & 55.56 F

I'm really psyched about this, thank you for the help. So sorry for the silly mistake. I can't believe I missed that and go figure - I'm a bookkeeper! By the way, congrats on your engagement

You're welcome and thanks for the congrats

I would also go for the 25% body fat number....

[shecould]

I would also go for the 25% body fat number....

Great, thanks!

[gobbles23]

Can I throw a question in here?? I was sick earlier this month, and for about 3 & 1/2 weeks I ate 1600-1700 calories, and the week before my period I had a tendancy to eat 17-1800 calories. I might have gotten two lame workouts in a week (for maybe 30 mins) during that whole period. I never gained a pound. So would this be bed-ridden maitanence? Around 16-1700 calories? Doesn't that seem a little high? Now I am doing a 5x5 full body routine, which lasts about 90 minutes, 3 days a week and trying to put on muscle, so to eat 200 over maintanence, I would have to factor in the amount I burn duing a workout as well? So maybe if I burned 300 calories during a workout, that plus 1600 would be maitanence and then eat 200 over that amount?? Is that right? Seems like a lot..

[Emma-Leigh]

^
No wonder you are confusing yourself!!! Don't make it so complex!

When you are sick - your metabolic rate increases, so you shouldn't base your basal rate off this.... So even if you were lying around it was probably ~ 1.2-1.3 x BMR, not your 'not doing anything' basal...

Anyway... Go back to basics:
121 # = 55 kg
Assuming BF ~ 20% = LBM = 44kg
BMR = ~ 1300 cals [which seems about right if you do 1.2-1.3 x = ~ 1600-1700 ]
Activity factor (moderately active < which takes into consideration your daily life and your workouts) ~ 1.4 = ~ 1850 cals to maintain when active.

To gain slowly, add 10%: ~ 2050 cals would be pretty good for you.

[gobbles23]

^
No wonder you are confusing yourself!!! Don't make it so complex!

When you are sick - your metabolic rate increases, so you shouldn't base your basal rate off this.... So even if you were lying around it was probably ~ 1.2-1.3 x BMR, not your 'not doing anything' basal...

Anyway... Go back to basics:
121 # = 55 kg
Assuming BF ~ 20% = LBM = 44kg
BMR = ~ 1300 cals [which seems about right if you do 1.2-1.3 x = ~ 1600-1700 ]
Activity factor (moderately active < which takes into consideration your daily life and your workouts) ~ 1.4 = ~ 1850 cals to maintain when active.

To gain slowly, add 10%: ~ 2050 cals would be pretty good for you.

Thanks! That makes things clearer. I will try eating this again, but bring up my calories much more slowly this time.

[ajangel25]

I've been trying to figure out the calculations and am so lost! I'm 5'3, 104 pounds and 14% body fat. Can anyone help?? LOL. I came up with 1364 for maintenance but I know that's not right..