Macros vs Micros – The Ultimate Guide

Most of the time, when it comes to nutrition, we like to think in terms of macronutrients.

Carbs.

Fat.

Protein.

Fibre.

Simple!

But maybe too simple?

Today we want to take a closer look at macros vs micros and find out what you need to pay attention to in your nutrition journey.

In the good old days, before your food was grown in nutrient depleted soil and the creation of nutrient-poor processed frankenfood, we just ate food. We didn’t have to worry about micronutrients. Pretty much everything we ate was full of them!

These days micronutrients are harder to come by. In a number of previous articles, I have suggested that maximising micronutrients as your first priority (before calories or macronutrients) will likely to be a more useful guide to help us genuinely optimise our nutrition.

Unfortunately, it’s hard to think in terms of micronutrients. With thirty-four essential nutrients and many more conditionally-essential and beneficial nutrients and compounds in the food we eat, there are just too many moving parts to keep in our working memory.

Before the creation of hyper-palatable flavoured and coloured foods, our appetite was a useful to help us seek out the nutrients we need. Over the years it had come to be the perfect nutrient optimiser, prioritising the foods we needed at any point in time. Unfortunately, in our modern food environment, our paleolithic instincts are no match for modern food chemistry.

Today, we need a little extra help to discern fake foods from the real foods that actually contain the nutrients we need to thrive.

This article outlines how we can utilise macronutrients to assist us, like training wheels, to help us get pretty close to ideal nutrition. We can then focus on eating nutrient-dense foods that will help us thrive and to enable us to look, feel and perform at our best.

Macronutrient wars

Many diet communities built around a specific macronutrient profile that they believe is optimal.

Different people believe in a wide range of macronutrient philosophies as the cornerstone of their nutritional approach. One of the many variations is IIFYM.

If It Fits Your Macros (IIFYM) or Flexible Dieting was a trend in the bodybuilding community based on the idea that you could eat pretty much anything you wanted as long as you hit your macro targets.[1] [2] [3]

IIFYM blossomed as a response to the ‘clean eating’ trend that grew around the Paleo diet[4] trend which emphasised food quality and was largely ‘macro agnostic’.

With IIFYM:

protein is set based on your lean body mass (LBM) and activity levels (typically 1.8g/kg LBM),

energy intake is calculated and then tweaked based on your desired rate of loss/gain,

fat is generally set at 25%, and

the remainder of your energy requirement is filled with carbs.[5]

IIFYM… the good

There are some good things about IIFYM / flexible including:

It’s simple. It avoids macronutrient extremes which often drive micronutrient deficiencies.[6] A consistent energy deficit will work for most people, particularly the young fitness enthusiast who does not have diabetes.

IIFYM… the bad

However, there are a number of downsides to the IIFYM / Flexible Dieting approach, such as:

No consideration of micronutrients. Food quality becomes critical when restricting quantity over the long term to avoid deficiencies and cravings.[7] Little emphasis is placed on food quality. While they might fit your macros, low nutrient density foods can be hyper-palatable and lead to overeating. Foods with a higher nutrient density are more likely to be satiating, have a lower energy density and be harder to overeat. Someone can get all their food from processed packaged foods and still comply with the IIFYM approach. Doesn’t cater well to people who are insulin resistant/diabetic. Recent research does not support the minimisation of dietary fat. While too much refined fat is not optimal, the fat that comes with nutritious whole food should not be a concern for most people. Tracking specific macros and calories replaces a neurosis about micromanaging food quality with an obsession with hitting particular macro targets. It may be hard to hit exact macronutrient targets with whole foods.

The minimum effective dose of macros

In reality, there is a range of macronutrient that will give you a substantial level of essential micronutrients.

The article Nutrition… How to Get the Minimum Effective Dose outlined the macronutrient ranges that give us the best chance of getting a reasonable micronutrient profile.

The vertical axis in the charts below shows the Nutrient Density Score which is a measure of the amount of micronutrients in a range of foods.

As shown in the example below, if we could get three times the recommended daily intake of all the thirty-four essential nutrients, we would get a perfect nutrient score of 100%. There is probably limited benefit in getting more than three times the recommended daily intake of a particular nutrient. At that point, you’ll likely benefit by focusing on foods that contain the nutrients you are not getting as much of.

I have calculated the nutrient density score for a range of dietary approaches to understand the relationship between micronutrient adequacy and macronutrients. Check out the detail in this post if you’re interested.

Protein

Of all the nutrients, protein has the highest correlation with nutrient density.

If we assume a nutrient density score of 70% as our minimum effective dose of nutrition (as denoted by the red line on the chart below), we can get a reasonable nutritional outcome when our protein intake is at least 19% of our energy intake.

Nutrient density seems to peak when we get around 45% of our energy from protein. .

If you have ever tried to more protein and track your intake, you will appreciate how hard it actually is to hit 45% of your energy intake from protein! As you increase protein intake to more than 45% of calories, you would need to depend more and more on processed foods, so the overall nutrient density decreases.

The minimum effective dose level of 19% of energy happens to align reasonably well with 1.8g/kg LBM protein which aligns IIFYM recommendation for protein. This is also aligns with the point at which strength gains start to plateau for strength athletes as shown in the chart from Lemon below.

Protein even more important when we are trying to lose weight. Recent research suggests that our need for protein increases if we want to prevent loss of lean muscle mass in a significant energy deficit.

If we are active and/or doing resistance training, then our requirement for protein is even higher. As shown in the chart below from a recent review paper by Stuart Phillips,[8] lean muscle mass is best preserved when we have at least 2.6g/kg total body weight (BW) protein if we are targeting an aggressive deficit (e.g. 35%). If we are chasing a less aggressive energy deficit, then 1.5 g/kg BW protein seems to be adequate.

So, unless you require a therapeutic ketogenic diet (i.e. as an adjunct treatment for cancer, epilepsy, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, etc.), it appears prudent to think of 1.8g/kg LBM as a minimum protein intake. Higher intakes will likely be beneficial if your goal is to maximise nutrient density or lose fat without losing muscle.

As an aside, you needn’t worry about ‘too much protein kicking you out of ketosis’ The images below are from my recent Ketogains Bootcamp where I was eating plenty of protein, had low blood glucose levels and plenty of endogenous blood and breath ketones from my own body fat.

As detailed in the Optimal ketone and blood sugar levels for ketosis article, if you are trying to lose weight or manage diabetes you really want to drive a low energy state in your bloodstream If you are burning body fat and/or are decreasing your blood sugar levels then ketones will come along for the ride. You don’t need to active chase them or track them.

The chart below shows the nutrient profile we get when we minimise protein.

There is a concerning trend of people trying to minimise protein to minimise insulin and mTOR. While these things are not good in excess, neither is missing out on essential nutrients of having consumed excessive amounts of energy to get the nutrients you need.

Given that not consuming an excessive amount of energy is the only thing that has been proved to extend lifespan in human it makes a lot more sense to me to increase your nutrient : energy ratio so you don’t have to eat as much to get the nutrients you need.

Carbohydrates

While the optimum intake of non-fibre carbohydrate is about 30%, it seems that the minimum effective dose of non-fibre carbohydrates is effectively zero.

Although we can get lots of vitamins and minerals from non-starchy veggies, people who do not feel the need to consume plants in their diet can get a substantial amount of nutrition from organ meats, shellfish and the like with minimal carbs.

The chart below shows the nutrient profile you could acheive if you focused on the most nutrient dense animal based foods.

If you are metabolically healthy, there’s nothing wrong with consuming up to 65% carbohydrates, particularly if they are from unprocessed sources. However, nutrient density starts to fall off beyond 65% as processed grains and sugars begin to dominate your diet.

The chart below shows the nutrient profile that you could achieve if you focused on the most nutrient dense plant-based foods.

Regardless of your dietary preferences, ethical position or religious beliefs, quantifying nutrient density is an exciting tool to help you optimise your food choices and find optimal nutrition within the wide range of reasonable carbohydrate intake levels.

Fat

Although fat doesn’t correlate well with nutrient density,[9] it seems we struggle to get a good nutritional profile with less than about 10% dietary fat (or about 0.4g/kg LBM dietary fat).

At the other extreme, we could consume up to around 65% of our energy from fat without having a detrimental impact on our nutritional profile. Similar to carbohydrates, it starts to get harder to get a broad range of essential micronutrients if we are getting more than 65% of our energy intake from fat.

The proportion of insulinogenic calories

The percentage of insulinogenic calories is a measure of the insulin we require to metabolise our food due to non-fibre carbohydrates and protein it contains.[10] [11] For someone who is metabolically healthy, insulin load does not need to be a major concern.

Optimal nutrient density seems to occur around 40% insulinogenic calories. Diets with more than 65% insulinogenic calories tend to be very low fat, very low in protein or very high in processed carbohydrates. Similarly, our nutritional profile with a very high fat very low insulin load diet is not so flash either.

I have drawn three windows on the chart of % insulinogenic vs nutrient density score to show suggested target ranges for:

someone who is insulin resistant has prediabetes or knows they have a family history of diabetes, someone with diabetes who needs to follow a low carb or nutritional ketogenic approach to manage their blood sugar, and therapeutic ketosis.

If you are insulin resistant or have a family history of diabetes, then keeping your insulin load below 50% is likely a good idea.

If you already have diabetes, then lowering your insulin load to less than 25% of your energy requirement will help stabilise blood sugar and insulin levels. You also need to keep an eye on nutrient density so you can build health with the food you are eating. The chart below shows the nutrient profile you can acheive with a nutrient dense low carb approach.

Meanwhile, someone who requires therapeutic ketosis (for the treatment of cancer, epilepsy, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s etc.) typically requires an insulin load less than 15% of their energy requirement to see therapeutic benefits. The chart below shows the nutrient profile that you can achieve with a high-fat ketogenic diet if you focus on maximising nutrient density.

However, keep in mind that driving your insulin load unnecessarily low can lead to a poor nutritional outcome. The chart below shows the nutrinet profile of the most ketogenic foods without consdieration of nutrient density.

Personally, I think you need to find the balance between insulin load and nutrient density that works for you. Ideally, a therapeutic ketogenic approach would only a short-term undertaking until the condition stabilises and you can transition to a nutrient dense low carb approach for maintenance.

Minimum effective dose + nutrient density for the win!

The table below shows the guidelines for the minimum effective dose of protein, fat and insulin load for different goals in terms of your lean body mass (LBM).

In all but the therapeutic ketosis scenario, we should aim to hit our 1.8g/kg LBM of protein.

We may need a lower protein intake to achieve therapeutic levels of ketosis.

In the therapeutic ketosis, diabetes and insulin resistant scenarios we limit insulin load to 1.1, 1.8 and 2.9g/kg LBM respectively to enable the pancreas to keep up and maintain healthy blood sugar levels. This will mean you need to reduce carbohydrates, and to a lesser extent protein.

approach min protein (g/kg LBM) min fat (g/kg LBM) max insulin load (g/kg LBM) therapeutic ketosis 0.8 0.4 1.1 diabetes / nutritional ketosis 1.8 0.4 1.8 weight loss (insulin resistant) 1.8 0.4 2.9 weight loss (insulin sensitive) 1.8 0.4 – most nutrient dense 1.8 0.4 – nutrient dense maintenance 1.8 0.4 – bodybuilder (bulking) 1.8 0.4 – endurance athlete 1.8 0.4 –

Once we have the protein, fat and insulin load ranges set, we are free, unencumbered by concerns about meeting theoretical macronutrient targets, to fill the rest of our diet with foods and meals that are most suited to our goals.

These macronutrient windows function a bit like bumper rails for a child at a bowling alley. As long as you stick within those ranges, you have a good chance of getting a reasonable nutritional outcome.

Once you learn to focus on nutrient dense foods, you will no longer need the bumper rails.

The table below shows how the parameters of insulin load, energy density and nutrient density are used to optimise our food choices to suit our goals. In some cases (i.e. weight gain or loss) we may intentionally focus on managing energy intake. For most people, focusing on more nutrient-dense foods will get you most of the way.

approach insulin load energy density nutrient density target calories therapeutic ketogenic very low – lower – diabetes / nutritional ketosis low lower adequate – weight loss (insulin resistant) low low good lower weight loss (insulin sensitive) – lowest maximum very low most nutrient dense – – maximum – nutrient dense maintenance – high high – bodybuilder (bulking) – high good higher endurance athlete – very high high –

How to set your target energy intake

If you are trying to lose weight and going to the effort of tracking, it is useful to have an upper limit energy intake that you make sure you don’t exceed.

While there are many inaccuracies involved in our energy in and energy out calculations, tracking your food in an app like Cronometer can be a useful self-education tool to understand the quantity and quality of your diet.

Most macro calculators calculate your Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR) based on your lean body mass (LBM) and activity levels. From this, you can estimate the amount of energy you might need to gain weight or the amount you will need to limit to lose weight.

These formulas, while a useful starting point, are only indicative, and should be used as a starting point. I’ve run the Nutrient Optimiser analysis for plenty of people who are lean but eating a lot more calories than you might expect. Conversely, many people who are obese seem to be eating much less than you might think they would be. This may be in part due to measurement error or optimism bias, but everybody’s metabolism seems to be unique due to a wide range of factors.

The best way to determine your actual energy requirement is to track your intake and reduce or increase from there to ensure you are gaining or losing as required. This is an iterative process based on your long-term trend.

Maximum rate of fat loss

The maximum rate of fat loss you can sustain without significant muscle loss is influenced by your current body fat levels. Someone with a lot more body fat might be able to maintain a larger energy deficit than someone who is already lean.

The paper A limit on the energy transfer rate from the human fat store in hypophagia (Alpert, 2005) proposed that this maximum rate of fat loss is 31 calories per pound of body fat.[12] According to Alex Ritson, in a recent Sigma Nutrition podcasts, this was later revised down to a maximum rate of fat loss of 21 calories per pound of body fat without losing significant muscle mass.[13]

While you may not want to target this maximum rate deficit every day, it is useful to be aware of this number. If you don’t feel hungry, there is no need to keep eating to hit some arbitrary energy intake above this.

The table below shows an example of what this might look like in practice.

obese lean weight (kg) 110 70 weight (lb) 242 154 LBM (lbs) 157 135 % BF 35% 12% BF (lbs) 85 18 BMR 2106 1871 max deficit (cals) 1,785 378 max deficit (%) 85% 20%

The obese person can nearly meet their entire maintenance energy intake from body fat while the lean person could only mobilise enough body fat to provide about a fifth their energy requirements.

While out might have enough body fat to survive an extended famine, I wouldn’t recommend fasting for extended periods without paying attention to periods of nutrient-dense refeeding.

Research into the Protein Sparing Modified Fast suggests that nitrogen balance is maintained with a minimum of 1.4g/kg of ideal body weight for men and 1.2g/kg of ideal body weight for women.[14] [15]

Once we account for body fat, 1.4 g/kg IBW ends up pretty close to the 1.8g/kg LBM minimum effective dose level discussed above).

So it seems reasonable to use 1.8g/kg LBM protein plus 0.4g/kg LBM fat as an absolute minimum energy intake to make sure you can get the nutrients you need.

Should I keep eating until I hit my calorie target if I’m not hungry?

Many people find their appetite stabilises once they take out refined carbohydrates from their diet and stabilise their blood sugar levels. Others find that focusing on nutrient-dense foods decrease their appetite and lead to spontaneous satiety.[16] Meanwhile, others just find it tough to keep within their calorie limits.[17] The bottom line here is, if you have obtained your minimum protein intake to preserve your lean muscle mass, there is no real need to keep eating if you don’t feel hungry.

Rather than some specific target, I think it is much more useful to think in terms of a range of energy intake that will enable you to reach your goals. If you’re hungry there is no harm eating up to your upper limit calorie intake. However, if you are trying to lose weight, then there is no point eating more than you need to to get the nutrients you need.

The daily thought process for someone following this process would be…

Have I met my minimum calorie target? If not, keep eating nutrient-dense foods. Have I met my minimum protein intake? If not, keep eating nutrient-dense foods. Do I feel hungry? If no, don’t eat. If yes, eat nutrient dense foods that align with your goals until you hit your absolute minimum energy target. Do you still feel hungry? If yes, then eat nutrient dense foods until you hit your maximum calorie intake. Have I exceeded my maximum energy intake? If yes, then stop eating.

Summary

So in summary:

Focusing on specific macronutrient targets takes the focus off food quality and micronutrients and can be counterproductive.

There is a range of macronutrients within which you can get a reasonable nutritional outcome that aligns with your goals. Within these limits, your focus should be on getting all the micronutrients you need.

If you are are insulin resistant or have diabetes then it’s prudent to focus on less insulinogenic foods. However, there is no point driving your insulin load to the point that you compromise nutrient density unnecessarily.

How to calculate your target macronutrient range

I know all these numbers can be confusing!

To help make this process easier we have developed a free report at NutrientOptimiser.com.

Simply enter your goals, preferences, weight and estimated body fat % and the Nutrient Optimiser will spit out a free report with your recommended macronutrient ranges as well as a shortlist of suggested foods and meals that will help you optimise your nutrition that will align with your goals.

To get your free report you go to NutrientOptimiser.com, tell us what you’re interested in and enter your email address.

As your situation changes (e.g. you lose weight or your blood sugars stabilise) you will be able to come back and update your details and get new macro targets as well as optimal meals and foods.

We think this is unique and exciting. We hope it will help a lot of people cut through the dietary confusion. We would love you to test it and give us some feedback.

I have included some worked examples of that the macronutrient ranges would look like in practice in the appendix below. But the best way to understand how it works is just to go have a play and see what the Nutrient Optimiser would recommend for you!

Example macronutrient ranges

So let’s look at how this will look in practice with some worked examples.

Let’s take the example of Paul, who currently weighs 90 kg and has 19% body fat. He’s done the Nutrient Optimiser analysis but wants to know what targets to put in Cronometer.

We will look at how he could use this approach to setting macronutrient ranges in the following scenarios:

therapeutic ketosis, low carb / nutritional ketosis, insulin resistant weight loss, and weight gain / athletic performance.

Therapeutic ketosis

Paul is interested in the ketogenic diet and recommends it to many of his clients.

The table below shows the range of protein, fat, carbohydrates (in grams) if Paul was aiming for therapeutic ketosis along with the basis for the upper and lower limits.

lower upper comment protein (g) 58 80 Minimum protein based on 0.8g/kg LBM. The upper limit is based on 15% insulinogenic calories assuming no carbs. fat (g) 180 212 Minimum based on weight maintenance with minimum protein and carbs. Maximum based on weight maintenance with minimum protein and carbs. carbs (g) 0 48 The upper limit corresponds to minimum protein and 15% insulinogenic calories. energy (calories) – – Calories are not limited on a therapeutic ketogenic diet. Many people using chasing therapeutic ketosis are looking to keep weight on, so very high levels of dietary fat intake is not a concern.

The chart below shows the resultant macronutrient ranges for the therapeutic ketogenic dietary approach in terms of percentage of energy intake. As you can see, regardless of the scenario, Paul’s energy would largely come from fat.

The chart below shows the nutrient profile of the foods listed above. The nutrients coloured yellow typically harder to obtain on a therapeutic ketogenic diet and have been emphasised in the foods listed above.

If you’re following a therapeutic ketogenic diet as an adjunct therapy for cancer, epilepsy, Alzheimer’s or dementia, then you’ll likely also be tracking glucose and ketone levels.

If you are following a disciplined high fat ketogenic diet, you should expect to see lower blood sugars and higher ketone levels.

If you want to get serious, you can track your Glucose Ketone Index (GKI) which was developed by ketogenic cancer researcher Dr Thomas Seyfried.[18] Through fasting, higher fat and a lower insulin load many people who require therapeutic ketosis aim for a GKI value of less than 1.0 which means your ketone values are higher than your glucose levels. If you are just looking to manage diabetes then having a GKI less than 10 is a healthy place to be on a day to day basis when not fasting.

Therapeutic ketosis takes a lot of dedication and discipline. Many people find that their condition resolves after a period and they can transition to a low carb / nutritional ketosis approach without triggering adverse symptoms.

Diabetes / low carb / nutritional ketosis

A diet for management of diabetes is not as restrictive as a therapeutic ketogenic diet and provides a higher level of nutrition. The table below shows the low carb style macronutrient range that would keep Paul in nutritional ketosis.

lower upper comment protein (g) 131 239 Minimum protein is based 1.8g/kg LBM. Upper limit based on maximum insulin load of 1.8g/kg LBM with zero carbs. fat (g) 131 178 Lower limit is based on weight maintenance with maximum protein and carbs. The upper limit is based on weight maintenance with minimum protein and minimum carbs. carbs (g) 0 60 The upper limit corresponds to minimum protein (1.8g/kg LBM) and a maximum 1.8g/kg LBM insulin load. energy (cals) – – Calories are not necessarily controlled on a low carbohydrate diet. The initial focus should be on stabilising blood sugars and appetite. From there we can force an energy deficit if necessary.

The figure below shows the range of macronutrients that will fit within the guidelines of a low carbohydrate diet to stabilise blood sugar or achieve nutritional ketosis.

Compared to a therapeutic ketogenic diet, the low carbohydrate diet provides a significantly high level of nutrient density. The nutrients shown in yellow that are harder to find on a low carbohydrate dietary approach that have been emphasised.

If you are following a low carbohydrate dietary approach, you will likely be tracking your blood sugars on a regular basis. Once you are able to stabilise your blood sugars to non-diabetic levels using a low carb diet, we can then start to focus on reducing energy to lose weight (i.e. if your waist : height ratio is greater than 0.5 or you have a higher than desirable level of body fat). From there you can start to focus on an energy deficit if you do not find you are achieving your desired level of weight loss with a low carb diet alone.

average blood sugar hbA1c (%) trig:HDL ratio mg/dL mmol/L diabetes > 140 > 7.8 > 6.5% > 3.0 pre-diabetes 108 – 140 6.0 – 7.8 5.4 – 6.5% 2.0 – 3.0 insulin resistant 100 – 108 5.4 – 6.0 5.0 – 5.4% 1.0 – 2.0 insulin sensitive < 97 < 5.4 < 5.0% < 1.0

Many people find that they actually need to drop their body fat levels further before they are able to achieve truly optimal blood glucose levels.

Aggressive weight loss

Paul actually wants to lose weight fairly aggressively, but without compromising his hard-earned lean muscle mass.

If we take 21 calories per pound of fat as the maximum rate of fat loss without significant loss of muscle, then Paul could theoretically cut up to 790 calories from his typical energy intake without significantly compromising his lean muscle mass. This deficit would leave him with 1349 calories. He will still be able to get his minimum protein and fat intake levels at this energy level.

Paul is eager to lose fat fast, so he wants to target an aggressive deficit of at least 20%. However, if he’s not hungry, there’s no real point in consuming beyond 1349 calories per day (i.e. a 37% deficit). Paul is also still mindful of his blood sugars and insulin resistance, so we will also ensure his insulin load remains under 2.9 g/kg LBM.

lower upper comment protein (g) 131 214 Minimum protein is based on 1.8g/kg LBM which is fine if he is only targeting a 20% deficit. The upper limit is based on 2.9g/kg LBM insulin load. fat (g) 29 132 Maximum fat is based on 20% energy deficit with min protein and carbs. carbs (g) 0 231 Maximum carbs is based on target energy deficit with minimum protein and fat. energy (cals) 1349 1711 Lower energy intake is based on BMR -21 cal/lb fat mass. The maximum is based on 20% deficit against BMR.

The screenshot below from Paul’s Cronometer showing how he can enter his target protein range. Simply click on the bar for energy, protein, carbs and fat to enter the target range.

The figure below shows the macro split including the energy from body fat (shown in yellow).

This figure shows the food proportion of protein, fat and carbs when we only look at the food intake. When we consider the food intake alone, between 30 and 55% of energy is intake will be from.

The chart below shows the high level of nutrients provided by the foods listed above. These foods also have a very low energy density meaning that they will be hard to overeat.

If your goal is aggressive fat loss, then you will likely be tracking your energy intake and body weight and fat on a regular basis to make sure you are achieving your desired results.

There is little value in regularly tracking blood sugars or ketones with this style of approach as they will likely be excellent if you are maintaining a significant energy deficit.

Paul’s focus with should be on making sure he gets adequate protein and nutrient dense foods while keeping under his energy target.

As an aside, Paul is doing well and sitting at #2 on the Nutrient Optimiser Leaderboard. You can see Paul’s detailed Nutrient Optimiser report here.

Maximum fat loss

The table below shows the macronutrient ranges if Paul was to target maximum energy restriction while minimising the risk of muscle loss. This is based on the maximum energy deficit of 21 calories per pound of body fat.

lower upper comment protein (g) 234 241 Minimum protein is based on 2.6g/kg BW in view of the aggressive deficit. The upper limit is based on maximum 2.9g/kg LBM insulin load. fat (g) 29 150 Max fat is based on 37% energy deficit with min protein and carbs. carbs (g) 0 108 Max carbs is based on target energy deficit with minimum protein and fat. We also want to limit Paul’s insulin load to less than 40% of his maintenance energy intake energy (als) 1348 A maximum deficit of 21 calories per pound of body fat (i.e. 37% deficit)

Even though the protein levels are very high and he has some history of insulin resistance, I do not think Paul is likely to see elevated blood sugar levels with such a massive deficit.

Some protein may be converted to glucose via GNG, however, there will already be such a dramatic energy deficit that he would likely be seeing very low blood sugar levels.

The chart below shows the macronutrient split, including body fat.

This chart shows the macronutrient split of this approach when we consider the food only. These foods contain between 56 and 72% protein which starts to make this style of approach difficult without significant reliance on protein powders. Achieving a strict Protein Sparing Modified Fast is actually quite difficult in practice because attaining such a high level of protein intake with such an aggressive deficit is quite hard.

The chart below shows the nutrient profile of these foods with the harder to find nutrients emphasised.

Weight gain

If Paul was wanting to gain weight, he could target a 20% energy surplus and choose nutrient dense and energy dense foods so he could achieve this.

lower upper comment protein (g) 131 289 Minimum protein is based on 1.8g/kg LBM. The upper limit is based on 50% of energy from protein. fat (g) 29 185 Maximum fat is based on 20% energy surplus with minimum protein and carbs. carbs (g) 0 348 Maximum carbohydrates is based on target energy surplus with min protein and fat. energy (als) – 2567 The maximum is based on a 20% energy surplus against BMR.

The list of nutrient dense and energy dense foods below would help Paul to maximise nutrient density in an energy surplus.

The chart below shows the nutrients provided by these energy-dense foods.

You should make a calculator for that!

To get your optimal macronutrient ranges please check out the new calculator at NutrientOptimiser.com.

We hope you love it! Let us know how we can make it more useful to help you achieve your goals.

references

[1] https://www.iifym.com/

[2] https://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/your-complete-guide-to-iifym

[3] https://www.avatarnutrition.com/

[4] Incidentally, paleo has been in decline since January 2014 while IIFYM peaked in mid 2016. Currently keto and vegan are the hot new diet trends.

[5] https://healthyeater.com/flexible-dieting-calculator

[6] https://optimisingnutrition.com/2017/03/19/micronutrients-at-macronutrient-extremes/

[7] https://optimisingnutrition.com/2017/06/17/psmf/

[8] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29182451/

[9] https://optimisingnutrition.com/2017/10/30/nutrition-how-to-get-the-minimum-effective-dose/

[10] https://optimisingnutrition.com/2015/03/30/food_insulin_index/

[11] https://optimisingnutrition.com/2015/03/23/most-ketogenic-diet-foods/

[12] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15615615

[13] https://sigmanutrition.com/episode207/

[14] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1646394/

[15] http://www.ketotic.org/2014/01/how-much-protein-is-enough.html

[16] https://nutritionj.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1475-2891-9-51

[17] https://ketogains.com/tag/tyler-cartwright/

[18] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274011072_The_glucose_ketone_index_calculator_A_simple_tool_to_monitor_therapeutic_efficacy_for_metabolic_management_of_brain_cancer

To kickstart your journey towards optimal get your free program and one of 70+ food lists personalised just for you!