Am I stubborn or silly? page

[Sanctus Real]

So, all this primal/paleo business has made me really interested in how I"m nourishing myself. And I've been trying to figure out my daily needs, which I know are nothing like the US government's RDI numbers. So, I've been reading through my books on this lifestyle, and I found some interesting info in Robb Wolf's The Paleo Solution.

On page 219 (on my Kindle, I don't know if the page numbers are similar in the printed book), Tables 3 and 4 list the daily needs for a 25 year old female who consumes 2200 calories a day. Even though I'm actually a 40 year old female, this was the closest I've found so far, so I'm trying to extrapolate. The macro needs are listed as follows: Protein - 217 grams/38%, Fat - 100.3 grams/39%, and Carbs - 100 grams/39%.

I'm not even sure how to eat to get near these levels of protein. They seem very high to me. When I adapt those recommendations to my caloric needs (around 1700 per day), these are the numbers I get. 170 grams protein, 76 grams fat, 85 grams carbs. Even when I supplement with whey protein and have a tuna packet for a snack, I can't get more than 120 grams protein without eating when I'm not hungry.

And do my carbs really need to be that low? I normally get around 30% each of carbs and protein and 40% of my diet is fat. I'm all for tweaking things, but I don't see how to eat *that much* protein in my normal two meals a day. I'll have to eat a dozen eggs in addition to my regular meals. I don't see how it's happening. I could add another meal, but I'm not hungry for more, and I feel like it's overeating. And I don't want to eat if I'm not hungry.

Am I being stubborn/obstinate, or is trying to extrapolate these number to my own needs a stupid idea?

[activia]

Usually protein is 1g per 1lb of lean body mass. As for carbs/fat that depends on your activity level. If you aren't hungry then I dont see the need to eat more to hit some number. You can try carb cycling.

[evertastica]

Go by your own needs and how you feel. Yes, it is important to research and try different things but one way is not the right way for everyone.
I think it depends on the lifestyle of the person but the 1g per 1lb of lean body mass method stated already by activia is more of how I go. Even .75 isn't too low as long as you get enough fat. Too much protein isn't necessarily the best thing for you. If you're full you're done, don't keep eating to match numbers.

[Analog6]

Go and sign up for the Cron O meter and it will give you figures based on the type of diet (paleo is a choice) or you can put your own % of protein/fat/carbs. Then you enter whether you want to lose 1 or 2 lbs pr wk or maintain, your age, sex etc and what exercise you are doing.

I am finding it very useful guide for keeping me on track. It is an indicator of how many calories (and those figures in %) which may be right for you. Once you have it you can tweak it.

[primalkyle]

...Protein - 217 grams/38%, Fat - 100.3 grams/39%, and Carbs - 100 grams/39%...

Numbers don't add up, something is wrong.

[NWPrimate]

Numbers don't add up, something is wrong.

[activia]

^^ you crack me up

Oh and he's right they dont add up lol

[sbhikes]

I think the grams of protein is the actual protein content. Meat is full of water, so the weight of the meat is much higher than the weight of the protein within.

[zoebird]

Is there a problem with your diet as it is? Are you not getting the results that you want?

I see no problem with 40-30-30. Why would that be a problem?

[activia]

Is there a problem with your diet as it is? Are you not getting the results that you want?

I see no problem with 40-30-30. Why would that be a problem?

Except that its 40/40/40