I don't know how to "do the math" and found this calculator helpful:
Calculate Your Nutrient Intake on Any Type of Low Carb Diet
Mark says that between 50-100 carbs is the sweet spot for weight loss. I usually fall at around 80 grams a day with no problems. But I am only eating between 1200-1300 calories a day. Does that mean that I should be eating less carbs? Is there a certain percent of my daily intake that should be carbs? I am around 25%carb 20%protein 55%fat and looking to lose weight and gain a little muscle.
And please don't tell me I need to eat more! For my weight and height its a recommended amount to lose a pound a week and I never feel deprived.
Thanks everyone!
I don't know how to "do the math" and found this calculator helpful:
Calculate Your Nutrient Intake on Any Type of Low Carb Diet
you are absolutely fine!
"dean ornish and dr. davis think the palmitic acid our bodies use for fuel while we sleep is poison if we eat it. zero-carbers like charles washington think the oldest fuel in our evolutionary history – glucose - used by organisms a billion years ago and without which the brains of modern mammals cannot survive for more than a few minutes – is an unnatural toxin if you eat it. both views ignore basic facts of medical physiology and defy evolutionary history." - kurt harris
Are you lifting weights?
Danni
Yes. Once or twice a week. But I'm a little girl and just started lifting. I have an extra protein shake on those days that has some carbs and whey protein.
That calculator says that I would need to eat less then 900 calories a day to lose a pound a week! I'm pretty sure that's starvation!
Yes, 900 cals is starvation, and likely to cause muscle loss, not gain.
As you want to gain muscle, then don't cut carbs any further. See how it goes ... and adjust as necessary.
You need to fool your body that it's not in an overall calorific deficit in order to gain muscle while losing fat, thus weight loss will be slower than if you just aim to lose fat.
It might be worth considering focusing first on gaining the muscle, with little or no fat loss, and then on losing the fat. Depends how much fat you have to lose.
F 5 ft 3. HW: 196 lbs. Primal SW (May 2011): 182 lbs (42% BF)... W June '12: 160 lbs (29% BF) (UK size 12, US size 8). GW: ~24% BF - have ditched the scales til I fit into a pair of UK size 10 bootcut jeans. Currently aligning towards 'The Perfect Health Diet' having swapped some fat for potatoes.
Well, that's all right then.
However, whoever recommends some set calorie count as necessary to "lose a pound a week" simply hasn't a clue what he or she is tailing about. Back in the 1950s -- yes, that long ago -- Kekwick and Pawan at the Middlesex Hospital showed that patients would lose weight on a 1000 kcal diet that was 90% fat but would not on a 90% carbohydrate diet with the same calorific value.
At the moment since you're counting carbohydrate and counting calories you're trying to run two systems in tandem -- one that works and one that's badly broken.
Stick to Mark's figures for carbohydrate intake, but frankly tracking how many "calories" you eat overall is simply unnecessary. Save yourself the labor of counting yet something else and just eat as much as you need. Eat as much as feels comfortable without either forcing down more than you want or letting yourself feel hungry.
If you want to lose fat and build muscle, eat less fat and more protein. That's a pretty low protein diet. Shoot for at least 1g/lb of lean body weight a day, but feel free to eat up to 2g/lb. The more active you are, the more protein IMO.
Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.
The Caveman Eats: My Primal Recipes for Athletes and Average Joe's Alike