How are my macros - new to Keto

[advanex1]

So, while in Iraq I was doing something close to it without even knowing. The only true carbs I ate were on my "cheat" days which were typically a saturday. It was mostly protein, salads, and the fat that came with a lot of the protein.

However, I'd like to start doing this correctly and would appreciate anyone just giving me a quick comment if these seem okay.

Current weight: 210
Target weight: 190 (for now would like to cut to 185 eventually)
Target kcal for 2lbs/wk loss: 1665 (roughly - this is not including making up kcals for my workouts during the days. I'll add kcal depending on approximate burn of workout)

Without workout -
1665 kcal
120g fat
100g protein
20g carb (roughly)
1680ish kcal

With workout (avg 300 kcal burn)
1965kcal
140g fat
120g protein
20g carb (roughly)
1960ish kcal

Would this work or do I need to fix something? Appreciate the quick feedback. Also, if my math is wrong.. I haven't done it in about 1.5 years... please correct me. If I remembered right while typing this it was 9-10kcal per gram of fat, and 4 kcal for carbs/protein.

[sambshep]

Rough calculations below...
BMR = 2100
x1.2 = 2520 (assuming sedentary activity level outside of workouts)
+Workout = 2820
-10% = 2538

Fiber @ 0.014g/cal = 35g
Protein @ 0.82g/lb = 172g
Carbs = 50g or less (not including TKD/CKD carbs)
Fat = Remaining calories

Eating below your BMR will cause a great deal of health problems for you, and furthermore, starting a diet at such a low deficit will minimize just how much weight you could lose (and most of the weight you would lose will be muscle tissue).

[advanex1]

Rough calculations below...
BMR = 2100
x1.2 = 2520 (assuming sedentary activity level outside of workouts)
+Workout = 2820
-10% = 2538

Fiber @ 0.014g/cal = 35g
Protein @ 0.82g/lb = 172g
Carbs = 50g or less (not including TKD/CKD carbs)
Fat = Remaining calories

Eating below your BMR will cause a great deal of health problems for you, and furthermore, starting a diet at such a low deficit will minimize just how much weight you could lose (and most of the weight you would lose will be muscle tissue).

Appreciate it. I'll adjust it a bit. I'm okay with some muscle loss for now as I don't want to be as bulky as I am currently. I'll see if I can at least stay around BMR for minimum kcal. Are you using the Harris-Benedict formula or is there a certain calculator you guys are using? Once again, thank you.

[Blibble]

Just to ask samb, because I've seen these calculations from you in my thread also.. How do you work out his BMR without his age, height, bodyfat %? Also your 1.2x multiplier I thought was for sedatory activity with no workouts, where you would use x1.375 for lightly active 1-3 workouts per week? Unless I'm wrong with that, but it's what I used for my calculation.

Also you advocate a 10% deficit but I thought 20% was the general consensus? A roughly 500 cal daily?


I worked mine out like; BMR = 66 + ( 6.23 x weight in pounds ) + ( 12.7 x height in inches ) - ( 6.8 x age in year )

BMR = 66 + ( 6.23 x 130 ) + ( 12.7 x 69 ) - ( 6.8 x 25 )
66 + 809.9 + 876.3 - 170 = 1582.2

x1.375 lightly active 1-3 workouts per week (3x 1.5hr workouts) = 2175.525

minus 500 cals for weekly deficit = 1675.525 or 1675.


Now your calculations in my thread, seem to match mine give or take 40 calories or so. Yet you're using a 10% deficit and I'm using a 20-23% deficit for a 3,500 weekly calorie deficit. I'm confused as to the difference in our workings out, yet they both seem to yield the same result.

[sambshep]

Just to ask samb, because I've seen these calculations from you in my thread also.. How do you work out his BMR without his age, height, bodyfat %? Also your 1.2x multiplier I thought was for sedatory activity with no workouts, where you would use x1.375 for lightly active 1-3 workouts per week? Unless I'm wrong with that, but it's what I used for my calculation.

Also you advocate a 10% deficit but I thought 20% was the general consensus? A roughly 500 cal daily?


I worked mine out like; BMR = 66 + ( 6.23 x weight in pounds ) + ( 12.7 x height in inches ) - ( 6.8 x age in year )

BMR = 66 + ( 6.23 x 130 ) + ( 12.7 x 69 ) - ( 6.8 x 25 )
66 + 809.9 + 876.3 - 170 = 1582.2

x1.375 lightly active 1-3 workouts per week (3x 1.5hr workouts) = 2175.525

minus 500 cals for weekly deficit = 1675.525 or 1675.


Now your calculations in my thread, seem to match mine give or take 40 calories or so. Yet you're using a 10% deficit and I'm using a 20-23% deficit for a 3,500 weekly calorie deficit. I'm confused as to the difference in our workings out, yet they both seem to yield the same result.

His age and height are in his stats (shown underneath the avatar), and body fat is unnecessary to estimate one's basal metabolic rate. I opt to use the 1.2 activity variable and then add 300 calories to account for an hour long workout, which provides an estimate of a bare minimum starting point, which in most cases is several hundred calories above what most people try to start out with, it's a ballpark figure and nothing more. Ultimately the scale will tell one what their maintenance calories are by checking it every week.

I advocate 10% changes because in general it's safer in terms of minimizing muscle loss as well as preventing too large of a caloric deficit (especially if one does not know their maintenance caloric intake).

To quote Emma-Leigh from the sticky in the Nutrition section:
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...hp?t=156380183

You then need to DECREASE or INCREASE intake based on your goals (eg: lose or gain mass). For this - DO NOT use a 'generic calorie amounts' (eg: 500 cals/ day) to add / remove. Instead calculate a % of your maintenance. Why? The effect of different calorie amounts is going to be 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.

[Blibble]

His age and height are in his stats (shown underneath the avatar), and body fat is unnecessary to estimate one's basal metabolic rate. I opt to use the 1.2 activity variable and then add 300 calories to account for an hour long workout, which provides an estimate of a bare minimum starting point, which in most cases is several hundred calories above what most people try to start out with, it's a ballpark figure and nothing more. Ultimately the scale will tell one what their maintenance calories are by checking it every week.

I advocate 10% changes because in general it's safer in terms of minimizing muscle loss as well as preventing too large of a caloric deficit (especially if one does not know their maintenance caloric intake).

To quote Emma-Leigh from the sticky in the Nutrition section:

Thanks, I understand how you did it now. Nice one.