# Macros and Losing Weight?



## ss4vegeta1 (Feb 8, 2014)

Will someone please explain to me if I have this right? So one wants to lose weight. They calculate macros and OVER TIME they lose weight with a good diet hitting those macros and exercise. So...

Take a guy, he calculates his macros, and say the TEE, BMR all that stuff equates to a 2000 cal worth of "macros" pro, carbs and fats he needs daily. Right? Please explain to me with the deficit of his exercise routine, how he CONTINUALLY loses weight EVERY week?

He wants to shave off 20% of his body weight? Just meeting said macros he will lose a 1-2 lbs a week? Even keeping the macros THE SAME for a month? I thought in order for one to lose weight they MUST lower their energy requirements once they lost some weight.

Can someone please tell me HOW one will lose 1lb a week consistently from the 20% deficit when the cal drop(while hitting macros) that hits their body in the first week is the SAME as in the fourth, the fifth, sixth...etc... Does that make sense? 

Suppose we were using Calories only instead of macros which is stupid but to make my point. Cal 20% reduced from original intake

Week 1 2000 cal
Week  2 2000 cal
Week XYZ.. 2000cal

With the calories the SAME one would NEVER lose 4lbs in a month. So why is it keeping Macros the same for a month WITH the 20% diet reduction, one may lose a lb per week? Why not they lose 1lb for a week and stop? Or More than 1lb that first week? How does the additional weight come off when intake is the same? Idk something I am missing. But I understand if one were clean bulking, depending on genetics one would gain lean muscle more so than eating 100% junk.


Idk... just gonna try hitting my macros, I want to lose 10lbs. Got my macros recalculated and gonna try for a month.


----------



## xtrmprodigy (Feb 8, 2014)

Assuming said person is only loosing fat their bmr will not reduce with the reduction of weight. This I due to fat not requiring any Cal's to maintain like muscle does. Now if he looses muscle his bmr will decrease


----------



## ss4vegeta1 (Feb 8, 2014)

xtrmprodigy said:


> Assuming said person is only loosing fat their bmr will not reduce with the reduction of weight. This I due to fat not requiring any Cal's to maintain like muscle does. Now if he looses muscle his bmr will decrease



So... basically if the bmr calories are reserved with the slight deficit(%20), the body will lose fat in the deficit consistently? Let me correct myself I am not saying it ALWAYS has to be consistent. I mean weight loss can and usually WILL stall. But I always thought with exercise and nutritional energy intake say "the deficit" will act as a stimulus for weight loss? I am still having a hard time connecting the dots where the body should lose when the macros are kept same for the following weeks & months. Even though the macros represent a reduction and we do our progressive overload with proper resistance training, how does the body lose 1lb per week with those said macros? From the progressive overload training?


----------



## xtrmprodigy (Feb 8, 2014)

I'm not sure if there is a language barrier or I just don't understand you. If your bmr is 2200 and you take in 2000 your at a 200 Cal defecit. No matter what if that's the number you are burning 200 calf more than you take in. Now its up to the body where it will pull the extra Cal's from(fat or muscle)


----------



## ss4vegeta1 (Feb 8, 2014)

xtrmprodigy said:


> I'm not sure if there is a language barrier or I just don't understand you. If your bmr is 2200 and you take in 2000 your at a 200 Cal defecit. No matter what if that's the number you are burning 200 calf more than you take in. Now its up to the body where it will pull the extra Cal's from(fat or muscle)



Right I agree to Cal in vs Cal out. Less Cal = weight loss from fat or muscle. Its up to the body genetics and sufficent macros for the muscle. The muscles require protein and fats and carbs. The fats just require excess cal from any 3 macros or insulin from too much sugars/carbs. 

The only thing I was wondering is we all agree that calc macros is the best thing to do, absolutely. Now with that SLOW 20% reduction of total calories. Then one establishes their macros, Right? Well say one follows the marcos in week 1 say 1 lb is gone. Now its week 4 should they still lose a lb like in week 1? How with no reductions? No reductions in cal from no macro changes but they are progressing in their training as we ALWAYS should be?


----------



## xtrmprodigy (Feb 8, 2014)

Because their bmr and defecit is still the same. If I weight 300lb as my bmr is 2000 and I eat 1800 that's the same as if I weight 200 and my bmr is 2000 and I eat 1800. Its still a 200 calorie defecit. -200 Cal's is -200 Cal's no matter how you look at it.


----------



## ss4vegeta1 (Feb 8, 2014)

xtrmprodigy said:


> Because their bmr and defecit is still the same. If I weight 300lb as my bmr is 2000 and I eat 1800 that's the same as if I weight 200 and my bmr is 2000 and I eat 1800. Its still a 200 calorie defecit. -200 Cal's is -200 Cal's no matter how you look at it.



I thank you SO much for your helping replies and helping me understand but... I totally understand the fact that the defecit under one's bmr will make the scale = weight loss. Thats not what I am saying. I am saying 

the 300lb dude meets his macros week 1. Those macros for eg are under his bmr. Ok fine he loses weight. WHY in the 5th week he should lose 1lb like in the first week? Why is the body steadily losing when the energy is the same, even below the bmr? Are you saying while the bmr is reduced the 20%, one will lose 20% CONTINUALLY? EVERY WEEK? 

bmr 2200
week 1 200 cal less with calculated marcos= weight loss lb (hypthethically)

week 6 SAME Macros as in week 1 = 2000 cal worth of macros

Your saying the weight loss of 1lb of week will STILL happen cause we are below the bmr?


----------



## xtrmprodigy (Feb 8, 2014)

Theoretically yes if bmr doesn't reduce for any reason


----------



## ss4vegeta1 (Feb 8, 2014)

xtrmprodigy said:


> Theoretically yes if bmr doesn't reduce for any reason



Ok, now I get it. Thanks so much. I am trying to give you reps but I dont know if it will allow me. 

One more thing, this whole thing is a bit confusing when in the past we used to use only cal to calculate or percentages.


----------



## Anthony Tate (Apr 14, 2014)

The calories you consume have to be less than your calories burnt.


----------



## rschaefer (Apr 18, 2014)

Most of those equations are based a untrained person and does not eqaute vigorous actvity. Your nutrion should mirror the type of exercise and goals you have. Remember, as you increase lean muscle mass you burn more claories which translates into bodyfat loss. Don't just count calories.


----------

