| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 738.1 | list by grams not percentages | MSDOA::GUY | | Wed May 06 1992 17:44 | 10 |
| from what I have read, been told by dr., etc....
based not on percentages but on grams per day...
>20 grams per day to lose
20>30 grams per day to maintain
30> grams per day most likely gain
hope this helps some.
nicole
|
| 738.2 | don't believe it for a second | TLE::TLE::D_CARROLL | a woman full of fire | Mon May 11 1992 20:00 | 9 |
| Giving fat by absolute weight as opposed to percentage doesn't really
make much sense - I'm surprised your Dr gave you those figures.
If you eat 2000 calories a day to maintain (which I do), that's a big
difference than eating 1000 calories a day. Bigger people need and can
burn more fat than smaller people.
30 grams of fat is about 15% of 2000 calories.
D!
|
| 738.3 | Counting grams easier than calculating %'s | ESCROW::ROBERTS | | Thu May 14 1992 15:08 | 25 |
| re .-1
I think you're right that you can eat more grams of fat per day and
still maintain. 60 is what I've heard. I disagree, however, with the
idea that counting grams isn't a good way to do it. If you want to eat
be sure that your diet contains less than a certain percentage of fat,
then all you have to do is figure out how many grams that comes to per
day. If you restrict your fat intake to that amount, you will most
likely meet or exceed your goal. And it is *LOTS* easier than looking
at the percentage of everything. I mean, think about a meal that has a
piece of meat, some bread, some vegetables. First you have to figure
the percentage of the meat, and it's probably way higher than the
percentage you want in your overall intake for the day. But you offset
that percentage with the low percentage for the vegetables and the
bread -- more figuring. This gets really tedious. If you just count
the grams, then even if you eat more fat-free food after you've consumed
your fat allotment for the day, your percentage of fat will be *lower*
than your goal.
For myself, I find that if I restrict myself to <20 grams per day, I
lose weight really fast. If I restrict myself to <30 I lose, but more
slowly. And while I'm doing this, I eat unlimited amounts of complex
carbohydrates and it does not seem to slow down the weight loss.
-ellie
|
| 738.4 | of *course* count by grams... | TLE::TLE::D_CARROLL | a woman full of fire | Thu May 14 1992 16:07 | 20 |
| >I disagree, however, with the
>idea that counting grams isn't a good way to do it. If you want to eat
>be sure that your diet contains less than a certain percentage of fat,
>then all you have to do is figure out how many grams that comes to per
>day.
Of course. How else would I do it? I never said any differently. I
said I didn't think giving and absolute grams-of-fat measure for all
people made any sense. Obviously, though, fat is measured in grams,
and for each person there is an optimal number of grams of fat.
I eat 2000 calories per day. 30% of 2000 is 600, which is 66 grams of
fat, so *I* should not eat more than 66 grams a day. That doesn't mean
other people, who eat different amounts of food, so eat the same amount
of fat as me.
The question I have is - 66 grams (30%) is an upper limit - what's the
lower limit?
D!
|
| 738.5 | Grams offat | ESCROW::ROBERTS | | Thu May 14 1992 17:02 | 19 |
| re .-1
OK, Sorry if I misunderstood your reply. YOu'll find that many people
who are watching their fat intake only think in percentages and try to
apply that to everything they eat, driving themselves crazy in the
process.
You're probably right that the amount of fat required for maintenance
varies from person to person. But the latest recommendation from the
health mavens is a diet of 15 - 20 % fat. This translates to 33 - 40
grams of fat in a 2000 calorie diet. I'm not sure how much extra fat
is required by extra physical activity, since I've heard that fat is
not directly burned by exercise. I.e exercise burns the fat on your
body, not the fat you eat. the fat you eat has to first be deposited
in your cells to be available for fuel. Myself, I find that extra
physical activity eliminates my desire for fat. I tend to crave things
like fresh fruit. Your milage may vary....
-e
|
| 738.6 | get up on your bike | TLE::TLE::D_CARROLL | a woman full of fire | Thu May 14 1992 22:23 | 8 |
| >I'm not sure how much extra fat is required by extra physical activity,
>since I've heard that fat is not directly burned by exercise.
Well, extra physical activity increases your required total calorie
intake level. Since fat is calculated as a percentage, then your
desired fat intake level would go up proportionally.
D!
|
| 738.7 | | MILKWY::ZARLENGA | who? ME? | Fri May 15 1992 02:21 | 5 |
| .5> is required by extra physical activity, since I've heard that fat is
.5> not directly burned by exercise.
True, neither fats nor carbohydrates are used by the muscles for energy,
ATP (adenosine(?) triphosphate) is. But they are used to synthesize ATP.
|